Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s representative field arguments on 12/12/2025 with respect to independent claim 1 has been considered and are not persuasive. The claims require that a first RF node “transmit at the same time” redundant data channels on a plurality of different RF spatial paths and/or RF frequencies.
The originally filed specification does not provide written description support for this limitation. While the specification discusses redundant data channels and synchronization in a mesh network, it describes transmission in a time-division duplex (TDD) system in which transmissions occur at different times. The specification does not describe concurrent or simultaneous transmission of copies of the same data channel over multiple RF spatial paths or multiple RF frequencies.
Applicant’s arguments regarding synchronization lock reacquisition, mesh network topology, or the use of data from another redundant channel do not address this deficiency, as such disclosures do not support transmitting redundant data channels at the same time, as claimed. At most, the specification supports sequential or time-multiplexed transmission, which is materially different from simultaneous transmission.
Regarding claim 1, the combination of Ma, Sachs and Philips specifically Ma teaches “a first RF node configured to transmit redundant data channels on a plurality of respective different RF frequencies” (as shown in FIG. 2; different transmission frequencies are employed over the plurality of channels offered; the slave controller 209 provides the same information to transmitting data channel one at 301 and data channel two at 302; the controller 209 manages the transmission of the same data stream across both the primary and backup data channels thus providing redundant communications. See Ma [Col. 4, lines 54–56], [Col. 9, lines 38–41], [Col. 9, lines 44–50]).
Therefore, as shown above the combination of Ma, Sachs and Philips teaches the amended limitations of claims 10 and 15.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a):
(a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention.
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112:
The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor of carrying out his invention.
Claims 1,10 and 15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention.
The specification fails to provide written description for the claim limitation requiring that the first RF node “transmit at the same time” redundant data channels on a plurality of different RF spatial paths and/or RF frequencies.
In particular, while the specification describes transmission in a time division duplex (TDD) system in which uplink and downlink transmission are separated in time, the specification does not describe or suggest that the first RF node transmits copies of the same data channel simultaneously from multiple antennas on different RF spatial paths, nor that redundant data channels are transmitted simultaneously on a plurality of different RF frequencies.
Accordingly, the limitation “transmit at the same time” constitutes new matter not originally disclosed in the specification.
For rejection purposes, the examiner interprets the limitation “transmit at the same time” as requiring concurrent or simultaneous transmission of redundant data channels over a plurality of different RF spatial paths and/or RF frequencies, an arrangement that is neither expressly disclosed nor inherently supported by the specification.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
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.
Claims 1,6-10,12-15 and 20-22 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ma et al. (US 8380126 B1; hereinafter “Ma”), in view of Sachs et al. (US 2020/0259896 A1; hereinafter “Sachs”), and further in view of Philips et al. (US 2012/0188998 A1; hereinafter “Philips”).
Regarding claim 1, Ma teaches a radio frequency (RF) communications system (Fig. 1 wireless system 100) comprising:
a first RF node (Fig. 2 wireless device 101) configured to transmit redundant data channels on a plurality of respective different RF frequencies (Col. 4, lines 54–56; different transmission frequencies are employed over the plurality of channels offered, Col. 9, lines 38–41; the slave controller 209 provides the same information to transmitting data channel one at 301 and data channel two at 302, Col. 9, lines 44–50; the controller 209 manages the transmission of the same data stream across both the primary and backup data channels thus providing redundant communications), and also configured to transmit a control channel for synchronization lock with at least one other RF node (Col. 8, lines 38–42; the communications master subsystem 106 initiates a wireless device-searching mode utilizing data channel one at 302 to locate and pair with an available data channel one (BT DC1) at 301 to establish a primary wireless communications data channel, Col. 9, lines 59–63; The master controller 208 and slave controller 209 provide, including Cyclic Redundancy Codes (CRC) checksum validation, path control, and data validation to manage the communication of data across each data channel); and
a second RF node (Fig. 2 wireless controller 102) configured to receive the redundant data channels on a plurality of respective different RF frequencies (Col. 4, lines 66-67, Col. 5, lines 1–2; the wireless controller 102 receives wireless device 101 transmissions via a communication master subsystem 106, typically comprising a transmitter and receiver, Col. 9, lines 44–51; the slave controller 209 manages the transmission of the same data stream across both the primary and backup data channels, thus providing redundant communications between the wireless device 101 and the wireless controller 102), and being subject to RF disruption so that a disrupted redundant data channel loses synchronization lock (Col. 10, lines 17–20; If the master controller 208 detects that the primary data channel is lost, corrupted, or unstable due to interference or other causes, the master controller 208 promotes the backup data channel, Col. 9, lines 44–50; If the slave controller 209 detects that the primary data channel is lost, corrupted, or unstable due to interference or other causes, the slave controller 209 promotes the backup channel to become the primary data channel).
However, Ma does not teach wherein each redundant data channel comprises a plurality of header blocks and a respective data block following each header block and a respective synchronization field associated with each header block, a synchronization field associated with each header block and having no state and timing information, reacquire synchronization lock for the disrupted redundant data channel based upon the synchronization field and data within another redundant data channel to determine start time of the synchronization field and in a shorter time than reacquiring synchronization lock using the control channel.
In an analogous art, Sachs teaches wherein each redundant data channel comprises a plurality of header blocks and a respective data block following each header block ([0013] a header of data packets associated with the data stream, [1038] One of the streams has a medium size payload, [2263] a plurality of paths for redundant data streams) and a respective synchronization field associated with each header block ([0013] a header of data packets associated with the data stream, [1536] 5G synchronization signal with a plurality of paths for redundant data streams; [2263]),
reacquire synchronization lock for the disrupted redundant data channel based upon the synchronization field and data within another redundant data channel to determine start time of the synchronization field and in a shorter time than reacquiring synchronization lock using the control channel ([0371] based on base station timing measurements of positioning reference signals from neighboring base stations and estimates the synchronization offset between base stations so that “virtual synchronization” with much better accuracy can be provided, [1096] The gNB receives working clock information from different external TSN nodes, multiple PTP domains, [1090] A SIB/RRC message containing the projected reference time value is then transmitted during SFNx and received by a UE in advance of tR, [0451] practical network synchronization algorithms can imply network synchronization errors of up to 360 ns. In the future, RIBM provides virtual synchronization accuracy of about 20 ns).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify a PTP signaling as taught by Sachs within the parameter of Ma. One would have been motivated to do so in order to improve the general handover robustness by reducing latency and improving reliability and spectral efficiency (Sachs [1138]).
However, the combination of Ma and Sachs does not teach wherein each redundant data channel comprises a synchronization field associated with each header block and having no state and timing information.
In an analogous art, Philips teaches wherein each redundant data channel comprises a synchronization field associated with each header block (FIG. 6 the sync field 720) and having no state and timing information (FIG. 6; [0099] The sync field 720 is used to indicate the start of the frame).
Therefore, 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 sync field as taught by Philips within the parameter of the combination of Ma and Sachs. One would have been motivated to do so in order to provide improved flexibility for setting up connections with reliable system network (Philips [0027]).
Regarding claim 6, the combination of Ma, Sachs and Philips, specifically Sachs teaches wherein the control channel operates as a contention control channel ([1207] Wi-Fi has a quality of service (QoS) mechanism called Enhanced Distributed Channel Access (EDCA), which mainly adjusts the random backoff time during channel access).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify a QoS as taught by Sachs within the parameter of Ma. One would have been motivated to do so in order to improve the general handover robustness by reducing latency and improving reliability and spectral efficiency (Sachs [1138]).
Regarding claim 7 the combination of Ma, Sachs and Philips, specifically Philips teaches further comprising at least one other RF node defining a mesh network ([0028] Mesh networking is a method to route data between nodes).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify a mesh network as taught by Philips within the parameter of the combination of MA and Sachs. One would have been motivated to do so in order to provide improved flexibility for setting up connections with reliable system network (Philips [0027]).
Regarding claim 8, the combination of Ma, Sachs and Philips, specifically Sachs teaches wherein the first and second RF nodes define a point-to-point communication link ([2414] device to device (D2D) communications).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify a D2D as taught by Sachs within the parameter of Ma. One would have been motivated to do so in order to improve the general handover robustness by reducing latency and improving reliability and spectral efficiency (Sachs [1138]).
Regarding claim 9, the combination of Ma, Sachs and Philips, specifically Ma teaches wherein each RF node comprises an RF transceiver and a controller coupled thereto (FIG. 2 device 101 comprises a transceiver 211 and a controller 209,
and device 102 comprises a transceiver 210 and controller 208).
Regarding claim 10, Ma teaches a radio frequency (RF) communications system (Fig. 1 wireless system 100) comprising:
a first RF node (Fig. 2 wireless device 101) configured to transmit redundant data channels on a plurality of respective different RF frequencies (Col. 4, lines 54–56; different transmission frequencies are employed over the plurality of channels offered, Col. 9, lines 38–41; the slave controller 209 provides the same information to transmitting data channel one at 301 and data channel two at 302, Col. 9, lines 44–50; the controller 209 manages the transmission of the same data stream across both the primary and backup data channels thus providing redundant communications),
a second RF node (Fig. 2 wireless controller 102) configured to receive the redundant data channels on a plurality of respective different RF frequencies (Col. 4, lines 66-67, Col. 5, lines 1–2; the wireless controller 102 receives wireless device 101 transmissions via a communication master subsystem 106, typically comprising a transmitter and receiver, Col. 9, lines 44–51; the slave controller 209 manages the transmission of the same data stream across both the primary and backup data channels, thus providing redundant communications between the wireless device 101 and the wireless controller 102) and being subject to RF disruption so that a disrupted redundant data channel loses synchronization lock (Col. 10, lines 17–20; If the master controller 208 detects that the primary data channel is lost, corrupted, or unstable due to interference or other causes, the master controller 208 promotes the backup data channel, Col. 9, lines 44–50; If the slave controller 209 detects that the primary data channel is lost, corrupted, or unstable due to interference or other causes, the slave controller 209 promotes the backup channel to become the primary data channel).
However, Ma does not teach each redundant data channel comprising a plurality of header blocks occurring at a first frequency, each header block having a synchronization field associated therewith, said synchronization field having no state and timing information, and an acquisition block occurring at a second frequency less than the first frequency; and reacquire synchronization lock for the disrupted redundant data channel based upon the synchronization field and data within another redundant data channel to determine start time of the synchronization field and in a shorter time than reacquiring synchronization lock using the acquisition block.
In an analogous art, Sachs teaches each redundant data channel comprising a plurality of header blocks occurring at a first frequency ([0013] a header of data packets associated with the data stream of 5G first frequency; [0631]), ([1038] One of the streams has a medium size payload, [2263] a plurality of paths for redundant data streams), each header block having a synchronization field associated therewith ([0013] a header of data packets associated with the data stream, [1536] 5G synchronization signal with a plurality of paths for redundant data streams; [2263]), an acquisition block occurring at a second frequency less than the first frequency ([1038] One of the streams has a medium size payload, [2263] a plurality of paths for redundant data streams comprising at least one redundant data stream, [0631] The 3400-4200 MHz will likely be the first frequency range. The mmW spectrum can be of interest); and
reacquire synchronization lock for the disrupted redundant data channel based upon the synchronization field and data within another redundant data channel to determine start time of the synchronization field and in a shorter time than reacquiring synchronization lock using the acquisition block ([0371] based on base station timing measurements of positioning reference signals from neighboring base stations and estimates the synchronization offset between base stations so that “virtual synchronization” with much better accuracy can be provided, [1090] A SIB/RRC message containing the projected reference time value is then transmitted during SFNx and received by a UE in advance of tR, [0451] practical network synchronization algorithms can imply network synchronization errors of up to 360 ns. In the future, RIBM provides virtual synchronization accuracy of about 20 ns)
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify a PTP signaling as taught by Sachs within the parameter of Ma. One would have been motivated to do so in order to improve the general handover robustness by reducing latency and improving reliability and spectral efficiency (Sachs [1138]).
However, the combination of Ma and Sachs does not teach said synchronization field having no state and timing information.
In an analogous art, Philips teaches synchronization field (FIG. 6 the sync field 720) having no state and timing information (FIG. 6; [0099] The sync field 720 is used to indicate the start of the frame).
Therefore, 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 sync field as taught by Philips within the parameter of the combination of Ma and Sachs. One would have been motivated to do so in order to provide improved flexibility for setting up connections with reliable system network (Philips [0027]).
Regarding claim 12, the combination of Ma, Sachs and Philips, specifically Philips teaches further comprising at least one other RF node defining a mesh network ([0028] Mesh networking is a method to route data between nodes).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify a mesh network as taught by Philips within the parameter of the combination of Ma and Sachs. One would have been motivated to do so in order to provide improved flexibility for setting up connections with reliable system network (Philips [0027]).
Regarding claim 13, the combination of Ma, Sachs and Philips, specifically Sachs teaches wherein the first and second RF nodes define a point-to-point communication link ([2414] device to device (D2D) communications).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify a D2D as taught by Sachs within the parameter of Ma. One would have been motivated to do so in order to improve the general handover robustness by reducing latency and improving reliability and spectral efficiency (Sachs [1138]).
Regarding claim 14, the combination of Ma, Sachs and Philips, specifically Ma teaches wherein each RF node comprises an RF transceiver and a controller coupled thereto (FIG. 2 device 101 comprises a transceiver 211 and a controller 209, and device 102 comprises a transceiver 210 and controller 208).
Regarding claim 15, Ma teaches a method of radio frequency (RF) communications (FIG. 1) comprising:
operating a first RF node (Fig. 2 wireless device 101) to transmit redundant data channels on a plurality of respective different RF frequencies (Col. 4, lines 54–56; different transmission frequencies are employed over the plurality of channels offered, Col. 9, lines 38–41; the slave controller 209 provides the same information to transmitting data channel one at 301 and data channel two at 302, Col. 9, lines 44–50; the controller 209 manages the transmission of the same data stream across both the primary and backup data channels thus providing redundant communications), and also transmit a control channel for synchronization lock with at least one other RF node (Col. 8, lines 38–42; the communications master subsystem 106 initiates a wireless device-searching mode utilizing data channel one at 302 to locate and pair with an available data channel one (BT DC1) at 301 to establish a primary wireless communications data channel, Col. 9, lines 59–63; The master controller 208 and slave controller 209 provide, including Cyclic Redundancy Codes (CRC) checksum validation, path control, and data validation to manage the communication of data across each data channel); and
operating a second RF node (Fig. 2 wireless controller 102) to receive the redundant data channels on a plurality of respective different RF frequencies (Col. 4, lines 66-67, Col. 5, lines 1–2; the wireless controller 102 receives wireless device 101 transmissions via a communication master subsystem 106, typically comprising a transmitter and receiver, Col. 9, lines 44–51; the slave controller 209 manages the transmission of the same data stream across both the primary and backup data channels, thus providing redundant communications between the wireless device 101 and the wireless controller 102) and being subject to RF disruption so that a disrupted redundant data channel loses synchronization lock (Col. 10, lines 17–20; If the master controller 208 detects that the primary data channel is lost, corrupted, or unstable due to interference or other causes, the master controller 208 promotes the backup data channel, Col. 9, lines 44–50; If the slave controller 209 detects that the primary data channel is lost, corrupted, or unstable due to interference or other causes, the slave controller 209 promotes the backup channel to become the primary data channel).
However, Ma does not teach wherein each redundant data channel comprises a plurality of header blocks and a respective data block following each header block and a respective synchronization field associated with each header block, a synchronization field associated with each header block and having no state and timing information, reacquire synchronization lock for the disrupted redundant data channel based upon the synchronization field and data within another redundant data channel to determine start time of the synchronization field and in a shorter time than reacquiring synchronization lock using the control channel.
In an analogous art, Sachs teaches wherein each redundant data channel comprises a plurality of header blocks and a respective data block following each header block ([0013] a header of data packets associated with the data stream, [1038] One of the streams has a medium size payload, [2263] a plurality of paths for redundant data streams) and a respective synchronization field associated with each header block ([0013] a header of data packets associated with the data stream, [1536] 5G synchronization signal with a plurality of paths for redundant data streams; [2263]),
reacquire synchronization lock for the disrupted redundant data channel based upon the synchronization field and data within another redundant data channel to determine start time of the synchronization field and in a shorter time than reacquiring synchronization lock using the control channel ([0371] based on base station timing measurements of positioning reference signals from neighboring base stations and estimates the synchronization offset between base stations so that “virtual synchronization” with much better accuracy can be provided, [1096] The gNB receives working clock information from different external TSN nodes, multiple PTP domains, [1090] A SIB/RRC message containing the projected reference time value is then transmitted during SFNx and received by a UE in advance of tR, [0451] practical network synchronization algorithms can imply network synchronization errors of up to 360 ns. In the future, RIBM provides virtual synchronization accuracy of about 20 ns).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify a PTP signaling as taught by Sachs within the parameter of Ma. One would have been motivated to do so in order to improve the general handover robustness by reducing latency and improving reliability and spectral efficiency (Sachs [1138]).
However, the combination of Ma and Sachs does not teach wherein each redundant data channel comprises a synchronization field associated with each header block and having no state and timing information.
In an analogous art, Philips teaches wherein each redundant data channel comprises a synchronization field associated with each header block (FIG. 6 the sync field 720) and having no state and timing information (FIG. 6; [0099] The sync field 720 is used to indicate the start of the frame).
Therefore, 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 sync field as taught by Philips within the parameter of the combination of Ma and Sachs. One would have been motivated to do so in order to provide improved flexibility for setting up connections with reliable system network (Philips [0027]).
Regarding claim 20, the combination of Ma, Sachs and Philips, specifically Sachs teaches wherein the control channel operates as a contention control channel ([1207] Wi-Fi has a quality of service (QoS) mechanism called Enhanced Distributed Channel Access (EDCA), which mainly adjusts the random backoff time during channel access).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify a QoS as taught by Sachs within the parameter of Ma. One would have been motivated to do so in order to improve the general handover robustness by reducing latency and improving reliability and spectral efficiency (Sachs [1138]).
Regarding claim 21, the combination of Ma, Sachs and Philips, specifically Philips teaches further comprising at least one other RF node defining a mesh network ([0028] Mesh networking is a method to route data between nodes).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify a mesh network as taught by Philips within the parameter of the combination of Ma and Sachs. One would have been motivated to do so in order to provide improved flexibility for setting up connections with reliable system network (Philips [0027]).
Regarding claim 22, the combination of Ma, Sachs and Philips, specifically Sachs teaches wherein the first and second RF nodes define a point-to-point communication link ([2414] device to device (D2D) communications).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify a D2D as taught by Sachs within the parameter of Ma. One would have been motivated to do so in order to improve the general handover robustness by reducing latency and improving reliability and spectral efficiency (Sachs [1138]).
Claims 4 and 18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ma, in view of Sachs, in view of Philips, and further in view of Goel et al. (US 2019/0190635 A1; hereinafter “Goel”).
Regarding claim 4, the combination of Ma, Sachs and Philips does not teach wherein the control channel comprises an acquisition block for acquiring synchronization repeating at a rate slower than a transmission rate of the respective synchronization field associated with each header block.
In an analogous art, Goel teaches wherein the control channel comprises an acquisition block for acquiring synchronization repeating at a rate slower than a transmission rate of the respective synchronization field associated with each header block ([0174] synchronization signal blocks (SSBs) which is at least four symbol period (each 16.67 microseconds); [0082] are repeated during each synchronization signal burst using a control channel; [0024]), ([0086] each node updates the aggregated delay before propagating the PTP message including a packet header; [0134] to a next end device in the network within 0.0001 second; [0084]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify a synchronization as taught by Goel within the parameter of the combination of Ma, Sachs and Philips. One would have been motivated to do so in order to support an efficient time synchronization for wireless communications to enable mobility of devices within the network (Goel [0005]).
Regarding claim 18, the combination of Ma, Sachs and Philips does not teach wherein the control channel comprises an acquisition block for acquiring synchronization repeating at a rate slower than a transmission rate of the respective synchronization field associated with each header block.
In an analogous art, Goel teaches wherein the control channel comprises an acquisition block for acquiring synchronization repeating at a rate slower than a transmission rate of the respective synchronization field associated with each header block ([0174] synchronization signal blocks (SSBs) which is at least four symbol period (each 16.67 microseconds); [0082] are repeated during each synchronization signal burst using a control channel; [0024]), ([0086] each node updates the aggregated delay before propagating the PTP message including a packet header; [0134] to a next end device in the network within 0.0001 second; [0084]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify a synchronization as taught by Goel within the parameter of the combination of Ma, Sachs and Philips. One would have been motivated to do so in order to support an efficient time synchronization for wireless communications to enable mobility of devices within the network (Goel [0005]).
Claims 5 and 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ma, in view of Sachs, in view of Philips, and further in view of Thubert et al. (US 2019/0132784 A1; hereinafter “Thubert”).
Regarding claim 5, the combination of Ma, Sachs and Philips does not teach wherein each redundant data channel comprises state and timing data for another redundant data channel.
In an analogous art, Thubert teaches wherein each redundant data channel comprises state and timing data for another redundant data channel ([0049] FIG. 9 discloses a plurality of connection paths of UEs with the generated link-state relationships and the link quality data (step 910 of FIG. 9), [0054] FIG. 6 discloses a selected connection path 502 where it is shown a time period).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing data of the claimed invention to modify redundant data channels as taught by Thubert within the parameter of the combination of Ma, Sachs and Philips. One would have been motivated to do so in order to improve communication reliability for low latency to enhance user experience (Thubert [0051]).
Regarding claim 19, the combination of Ma, Sachs and Philips does not teach wherein each redundant data channel comprises state and timing data for another redundant data channel.
In an analogous art, Thubert teaches wherein each redundant data channel comprises state and timing data for another redundant data channel ([0049] FIG. 9 discloses a plurality of connection paths of UEs with the generated link-state relationships and the link quality data (step 910 of FIG. 9), [0054] FIG. 6 discloses a selected connection path 502 where it is shown a time period).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing data of the claimed invention to modify redundant data channels as taught by Thubert within the parameter of the combination of Ma, Sachs and Philips. One would have been motivated to do so in order to improve communication reliability for low latency to enhance user experience (Thubert [0051]).
Conclusion
The following prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure:
US 2010/0278526 A1 (Duan et al.) discloses a method for protecting optoelectronic integrated apparatus.
US 2012/0140654 A1 (PAK et al.) discloses a method and apparatus for managing a backup channel in a multi-channel environment.
US 2021/0168574 A1 (ZHANG et al.) discloses methods and systems for beamforming and grouping for new radio (NR) vehicle to anything (V2X).
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. 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 THEODORE IM whose telephone number is (571)270-1955. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9AM-5PM ET.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, UN C CHO can be reached on 571-272-7919. 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.
/T.I./ Examiner, Art Unit 2413
/UN C CHO/ Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2413
Prosecution Insights