DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Claims 1 to 20 are presented for examination.
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.
Claims 13, 15 and 17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Quan et al. (WO 2022094974).
Claims 13 and 17:
Quan substantially teaches the claimed invention. Quan teaches a computer device having a memory (4) and a processor (1) for performing a method for broadcasting data between an access point (AP) and multiple stations (STA1, STA2 and STA3) (see par. 0318 and 0061). Quan teaches that an access point (20) is a device deployed in an access network to provide wireless communication functionality for site (10) (see par. 0064). Quan teaches that AP sends data to a STA that needs to be served in a multicast/broadcast manner and different stations may retransmit different data (see par. 0067).
Quan teaches that the AP determines a quantity of MPDUs in each block and may implement a special A-MPDU (see par. 0105 to 0106). Quan teaches that the AP sends network coding data frames (see par. 0109 to 0110). Quan teaches that fa method for meeting reliable multicast retransmission data frames comprises re-encapsulated the removed MAC layer frame header (see par. 0112).
Quan teaches that the received MAC frame is uploaded and checked to determine the sequence number (SN) specifically performing XOR network coding (see par. 0118). Quan teaches that a block ACK feedback is performed on the block that has not been completely decoded (see par. 0119). Quan further teaches that the method uploads the frames and decodes the received frames based on an upper-layer protocol (see par. 0124 et seq.).
Quan fails to specifically teach the limitation of “determine a feedback value, wherein the feedback value is a number of additional network coded packets to decode the first set of packets or a number of packets received by the second STA;” however, this teaching is obvious to the teachings of Quan because Quan teaches that ensuring reliable multicast transmission frames includes a network coding module configured to perform network coding operation based on an encoding function that provides a determination of when to send network encoded data (see par. 0212). Quan also teaches that a rate control is dependent on a feedback situation (see par. 0213).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the reliable multicast transmission frames method of Quan to include the claimed limitation of: “determine a feedback value, wherein the feedback value is a number of additional network coded packets to decode the first set of packets or a number of packets received by the second STA” because Quan teaches that a network coding module selects and process network encoding frames for reliable multicast/broadcast of frames between AP and STA’s. This modification would have been obvious because a person of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to employ a method for ensuring reliable multicast transmission of frames using a network encoding module as taught by Quan (see par, 0228). As to the other limitations of the claim, Quan teaches that the block ACK includes data sent by at least two stations to determine the status of the network encoded data (see par. 0285).
As per claim 15, Quan teaches that a liner random network coding maybe used in a multicast retransmission mechanism (see par. 0247). Quan also teaches that all users data are successfully decoded and received the target data (see par. 0245).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 14, 16, and 18 to 20 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Claims 1 to 12 are allowed.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: the prior art made of record, teaches a data transmission method and an apparatus for multicast/broadcast communication in a network as detailed above; however, the prior art made of record, taken alone or in combination fails to teach or fairly suggest or render obvious the combination of elements with the novel element of: “generate one or more network coded packets of a pool of network coded packets for transmission in the A-MPDU, wherein the one of more network coded packets comprises encoded combinations of the first set of packets, and generate the A-MPDU for transmission to the second STA with the first number of packets, the first number of packets comprising at least one of the one or more network coded packets from the pool of network coded packets.”
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Lin et al. (USPAP 2015/0049677) discloses a method and device for frame aggregation transmission of wireless network system.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SHELLY A CHASE whose telephone number is (571)272-3816. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Thu 8:00-5:30, 2nd Friday 8:00-4:30.
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, Albert Decady can be reached at 571-272 3819. 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.
/Shelly A Chase/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2112
Prosecution Insights