Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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 .
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1, 11 and 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Xin; Liangxiao et al. US PGPUB 20220322438 A1.
Regarding claim 1. Xin teaches An apparatus of a non-access point station (STA), the apparatus comprising: processing circuitry; and memory, (Fig. 12, CPU and RAM) wherein for transmission of a physical layer protocol data unit (PPDU) to an access point station (AP), (Fig. 14) the processing circuitry is to configure the STA to:
perform an enhanced distributed channel access (EDCA) process to access a wireless medium for an initial transmission of the PPDU based on initial EDCA parameters, ([0111] the STA sets its EDCA parameter AIFSN[AC_i] (i.e., the AIFSN for AC_i) equal to that parameter from AP minus one or more, and can use non-zero random backoff procedure to contend for the channel.) )the EDCA process comprising
determining a random backoff for accessing the medium based on an access category of the PPDU; ([0111] or example, the AIFSN[AC_VO] is 2 in the EDCA parameter set element from AP. Then, the STA sets the AIFSN[AC_VO] to 1 for a non-zero backoff procedure for AC_VO. The rest of the parameters for that AC_i can be set the same as those from the AP or adjusted similar as AIFSN.)
wherein if the initial transmission of the PPDU is unsuccessful, ([0043] A retransmission may be required if the STA does not receive an ACK before timeout; otherwise the transmission succeeds.) for retransmission of the PPDU, the processing circuitry is configured to:
update the EDCA parameters to EDCA parameters for prioritized access; ([0050] Then, for a retransmission it sets another backoff time in which the size of the contention window is n slots. After waiting the backoff time, the transmitter STA retransmits the packet for the first time. However, the retransmission also fails. The transmitter STA needs to retransmit the packet and sets another backoff time to contend for channel access. This time, the size of the contention window is doubled, which is 2*n slots, due to the retransmission. The expected backoff time is also doubled by the contention window size. The second retransmission succeeds since it receives an ACK before timeout.) and
determine a backoff for accessing the wireless medium and retransmission of the PPDU based on the EDCA parameters for prioritized access, (Id.)
wherein the EDCA parameters for prioritized access are configured to give the STA a higher probability of accessing the wireless medium for a PPDU retransmission than use of the initial EDCA parameters. ([0039] The disclosed non-zero backoff procedure can guarantee a bounded time for STAs to complete channel contention. Moreover, the non-zero backoff procedure obtains a higher probability to gain an earlier channel access than the legacy backoff procedure,)
Regarding claim 11. Xin teaches A non-transitory computer-readable storage medium that stores instructions for execution by processing circuitry of a non-access point station (STA), (Fig. 12, CPU and RAM) wherein for transmission of a physical layer protocol data unit (PPDU) to an access point station (AP), (Fig. 14) the processing circuitry is to configure the STA to perform the steps in claim 1. It is rejected for the same reasons.
Regarding claim 19. Xin teaches A method performed by processing circuitry of a non-access point station (STA) for transmission of a physical layer protocol data unit (PPDU) to an access point station (AP), the method comprising steps recited in claims 1. They are rejected for the same reasons.
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 (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
The factual inquiries 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.
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 2, 5, 8-9, 12, 15-16, and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Xin as applied to claim 1, 11 and 19 above, and further in view of PARK; Hanjun et al. US PGPUB 20210144763 A1.
Regarding claim 2. Xin teaches The apparatus of claim 1, wherein the CWmin based on the access category of the PPDU, ([0062] Table 2 lists the default parameter setting for EDCA channel access. Each AC has its own minimum contention window and maximum contention window. AIFS Number (AIFSN) represents the AIFS duration in terms of the number of backoff slots,)
wherein the EDCA process to access the medium for the initial transmission of the PPDU is performed in accordance with one of four access categories comprising, in order from highest to lowest priority: Voice (AC_VO), Video (AC_VI), Best Effort (AC_BE) and Background (AC_BK) access categories, ([0067] FIG. 11 illustrates the format of AC_X (e.g., AC_VO, AC_VI, AC_BE, AC_BK) Parameter Record field as defined in IEEE 802.11. An AC/AIFSN field indicates the access category (AC) of this field and the parameter set of the AIFSN. An ECWmin/ECWmax field indicates the minimum contention window (CW) size and maximum CW size of the AC. A TXOP limit field indicates the TXOP limit of the AC.) and
wherein to provide the prioritized access, the EDCA parameters for the prioritized access have lower values for one or more of the CWmin and an arbitration inter-frame space number (AIFSN) than the four access categories. ([0069] When this non-zero backoff procedure is used by the EDCAF of an AC in EDCA, it is preferably utilized with a shorter AIFS time (smaller AIFSN) so that the non-zero backoff procedure is given a higher priority compared with legacy backoff procedure with the same CW.
[0105] Since the number of backoff slots is not zero, an AIFS time plus at least one backoff slot time will be always longer than a PIFS time. That is, the recovery procedure for retransmissions can access the channel faster than the non-zero backoff procedure.)
Xin does not teach , wherein for the initial transmission of the PPDU, the random backoff is determined to be between zero and a minimum contention window (CWmin),
However, Park teaches wherein for the initial transmission of the PPDU, the random backoff is determined to be between zero and a minimum contention window (CWmin), ([0154] For example, when an eNB intends to access a channel via an LBT operation of class 3, since CWmin (=15) is configured as an initial CWS, the eNB performs random backoff by randomly selecting an integer from among numbers ranging from 0 to 15.)
In order to prevent interference ([0149])
Xin and Park are analogous art in the same field of endeavor of wireless communication. It would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person with ordinary skill in the art to modify the method in Xin with the technique of random backoff in Park in order to prevent interference.
Regarding claim 5. Xin and Park teaches The apparatus of claim 2, and Xin teaches wherein the EDCA parameters for prioritized access comprise EDCA parameters for the voice access category when the EDCA process to access the medium for the initial transmission of the PPDU utilized EDCA parameters for a lower priority access category. ([0100] It will be noted that when STA1 uses a non-zero backoff procedure in an EDCAF, it can also use an AIFS whose time is different from that of the legacy backoff procedure. For example, for AC_VO, when STA1 uses non-zero backoff procedure, it can set the AIFSN of AC_VO to 1. When STA1 uses a legacy backoff procedure, it can set the AIFSN of AC_VO to 2)
Regarding claim 6. Xin and Park teach The apparatus of claim 2, Xin teaches
wherein after transmission of the reservation signal, the processing circuitry is to configure the STA to contend for the medium using EDCA parameters for preemption, wherein the EDCA parameters for preemption comprise a shortened backoff, the shortened backoff being less that a backoff for the voice access category. ([0114] FIG. 19 illustrates an example embodiment 190 in which an EDCA system of a STA uses some EDCAFs for a non-zero backoff procedure and other EDCAFs for a legacy backoff procedure, for accessing Channel 210. For a MAC Service Data Unit (MSDU) or User Priority (UP) 192, the AC queues are shown as AC_VO 194, AC_VI 198, AC_BE 202 and AC_BK 206. As shown in the figure, the AC_VO EDCAF 196 uses a non-zero backoff procedure with short AIFS while the EDCAFs 200, 204 and 208 of the other ACs use a legacy backoff procedure.)
Xin does not teach wherein for retransmission of the PPDU, the STA is configured to preempt the wireless medium by transmission of a reservation signal less than a SIFS after a start of a contention period,
However, Park teaches
wherein for retransmission of the PPDU, the STA is configured to preempt the wireless medium by transmission of a reservation signal less than a SIFS after a start of a contention period, ([0180] Or, similar to ACK transmission of Wi-Fi corresponding to a different RAT of an unlicensed band, a UE transmits a reservation signal of a length equal to or shorter than a prescribed length after prescribed time (e.g., SIFS (short inter frame space) at the timing at which DL TX burst (or PDSCH received by the UE) ends)
In order to prevent interference ([0149])
Xin and Park are analogous art in the same field of endeavor of wireless communication. It would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person with ordinary skill in the art to modify the method in Xin with the technique of random backoff in Park in order to prevent interference.
Regarding claim 8. Xin and Park teach The apparatus of claim 2, Xin teaches wherein when the initial transmission of the PPDU is successful or when the retransmission of the PPDU is successful, for subsequent PPDU transmissions the processing circuitry is configured to switch back use of the initial EDCA parameters, ([0111] The AP first transmits or broadcasts 172 a frame including the EDCA parameter setting, e.g., EDCA parameter set element, to its associated STAs. A check 174 is performed to determine, if the receiver STA supports a non-zero backoff procedure. If the non-zero backoff is supported then at block 176, the STA sets its EDCA parameter AIFSN[AC_i] (i.e., the AIFSN for AC_i) equal to that parameter from AP minus one or more, and can use non-zero random backoff procedure to contend for the channel. For example, the AIFSN[AC_VO] is 2 in the EDCA parameter set element from AP. Then, the STA sets the AIFSN[AC_VO] to 1 for a non-zero backoff procedure for AC_VO. The rest of the parameters for that AC_i can be set the same as those from the AP or adjusted similar as AIFSN.)and
wherein when the retransmission of the PPDU is unsuccessful using the EDCA parameters for prioritized access, the processing circuitry is configured to utilize the EDCA parameters for prioritized access for subsequent retransmissions of the PPDU. ([0050] Then, for a retransmission it sets another backoff time in which the size of the contention window is n slots. After waiting the backoff time, the transmitter STA retransmits the packet for the first time. However, the retransmission also fails. The transmitter STA needs to retransmit the packet and sets another backoff time to contend for channel access. This time, the size of the contention window is doubled, which is 2*n slots, due to the retransmission. The expected backoff time is also doubled by the contention window size. The second retransmission succeeds since it receives an ACK before timeout.)
Regarding claim 9. Xin and Park teach The apparatus of claim 8, wherein the processing circuitry is to configure the STA to: refrain from utilizing the EDCA parameters for prioritized access when a collision has not occurred; and refrain from utilizing the EDCA parameters for prioritized access for an initial transmission of a PPDU. (([0111] The AP first transmits or broadcasts 172 a frame including the EDCA parameter setting, e.g., EDCA parameter set element, to its associated STAs. A check 174 is performed to determine, if the receiver STA supports a non-zero backoff procedure. If the non-zero backoff is supported then at block 176, the STA sets its EDCA parameter AIFSN[AC_i] (i.e., the AIFSN for AC_i) equal to that parameter from AP minus one or more, and can use non-zero random backoff procedure to contend for the channel. For example, the AIFSN[AC_VO] is 2 in the EDCA parameter set element from AP. Then, the STA sets the AIFSN[AC_VO] to 1 for a non-zero backoff procedure for AC_VO. The rest of the parameters for that AC_i can be set the same as those from the AP or adjusted similar as AIFSN.))
Regarding claim 12, 15 and 16, . Xin and Park teaches The non-transitory computer-readable storage medium of claim 11, performing the steps recited in claim 2, 5, and 6, 8. They are rejected for the same reasons.
Regarding claim 20. Xin teaches A method performed by processing circuitry of a non-access point station (STA) for transmission of a physical layer protocol data unit (PPDU) to an access point station (AP), the method comprising steps recited in claims 2. They are rejected for the same reasons.
Claims 3-4 and 13-14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Xin and Park as applied to claim 2 and 12 above, and further in view of Kangude; Shantanu et al. US PGPUB 20070110092 A1.
Regarding claim 3. Xin and Park teach The apparatus of claim 2, but they don’t teach wherein the EDCA parameters for prioritized access comprise EDCA parameters for a fifth access category, the fifth access category being a higher priority access category than the voice access category.
However, Kangude teaches
wherein the EDCA parameters for prioritized access comprise EDCA parameters for a fifth access category, the fifth access category being a higher priority access category than the voice access category. ([0031] As mentioned previously, data traffic under EDCA is prioritized by placing the traffic in one of four access categories: voice, video, best effort, and background. In an embodiment, a new, fifth EDCA access category is created in addition to the four existing categories. Data traffic in this fifth access category is highly likely to be transmitted prior to traffic in the other four access categories. Voice, video, and other high priority traffic in a mesh network can be placed in the fifth access category to increase the likelihood that such traffic will take precedence over lower priority traffic.)
in order to increase system reliability by recover from packet collision ([0015])
Xin and Kangude are analogous art in the same field of endeavor of wireless communication. It would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person with ordinary skill in the art to modify the method in Xin with the technique of new access category in Kangude in order to increase system reliability.
Regarding claim 4. Xin, Park and Kangude teaches The apparatus of claim 3, and Kangude teaches wherein the processing circuitry is configured to decode one of a beacon frame, a management frame and a probe response frame from the AP ([0007] PIFS is typically used by a central controller in polling the stations in a LAN or for management traffic such as beacon frames. PIFS has a shorter interframe space and therefore higher priority than DIFS. SIFS is typically used for control traffic, as opposed to ordinary data traffic, and has the shortest interframe space and therefore provides the highest priority.) )to receive the EDCA parameters for prioritized access. ([0031] In an embodiment, a new, fifth EDCA access category is created in addition to the four existing categories.)
in order to increase system reliability by recover from packet collision ([0015])
Xin and Kangude are analogous art in the same field of endeavor of wireless communication. It would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person with ordinary skill in the art to modify the method in Xin with the technique of new access category in Kangude in order to increase system reliability.
Regarding claim 13-14 . Xin, Park and Kangude teaches The non-transitory computer-readable storage medium of claim 12, performing the steps recited in claim 3-4. They are rejected for the same reasons.
Claims 7 and 17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Xin and Park as applied to claim 2 and 12 above, and further in view of Damnjanovic; Aleksandar et al. US PGPUB 20200053599 A1.
Regarding claim 7. Xin and Park teach The apparatus of claim 6, but they don’t teach wherein the reservation signal comprises only a preamble comprising a shortened training field signal to trigger symbol detection by other STAs.
However, Damnjanovic teaches the reservation signal comprises only a preamble comprising a shortened training field signal to trigger symbol detection by other STAs. ([0149] In some examples, the reservation manager 1120 may prepend the first coexistence preamble to a short training field (STF) of a wireless local area network (WLAN) frame. In some examples, the reservation manager 1120 may puncture a short training field (STF) of a WLAN frame with the first coexistence preamble. In some examples, the reservation manager 1120 may transmit the first coexistence preamble a fixed distance following a short training field (STF) of a WLAN frame.)
In order to improve channel sensing. ([0004]).
Xin and Damnjanovic are analogous art in the same field of endeavor of wireless communication. It would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person with ordinary skill in the art to modify the method in Xin with the technique of reservation signal in Damnjanovic in order to improve channel sensing.
Regarding claim 17. Xin, Park and Kangude teaches The non-transitory computer-readable storage medium of claim 11, performing the steps recited in claim 7. They are rejected for the same reasons.
Claim 10 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Xin and Park as applied to claim 9 above, and further in view of GUO YONGKANG et al. EP 4213446 A1.
Regarding claim 10. Xin and Park teach The apparatus of claim 9, but it does not teach wherein the processing circuitry is configured to reduce a transmission rate for retransmission of the PPDU using the EDCA parameters for prioritized access.
However, Guo teaches wherein the processing circuitry is configured to reduce a transmission rate for retransmission of the PPDU using the EDCA parameters for prioritized access. ([0086] In this embodiment of this application, the packet transmission latency is reduced through measures such as (1) setting different EDCA parameters, (2) setting percentages of bandwidths, of the Wi-Fi air interface, occupied by the private queues and the standard queues or percentages of traffic of the private queues and the standard queues, (3) reducing the maximum air interface rate (that is, limiting a quantity of air interface retransmissions),)
In order to improve packet transmission efficiency. (col 11, above [0058])
Xin and Guo are analogous art in the same field of endeavor of wireless communication. It would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person with ordinary skill in the art to modify the method in Xin with the technique of lower rate for retransmission in Guo in order to improve packet transmission efficiency.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ZHAOHUI YANG whose telephone number is (571)270-7527. The examiner can normally be reached 9 AM to 5 PM M-F.
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, Marcus Smith can be reached at 571 270-1096. 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.
/ZHAOHUI YANG/Examiner, Art Unit 2468
/MARCUS SMITH/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2468