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 .
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted is being considered by the examiner.
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.
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.
Claim(s) 1 – 6, 8 – 12 and 15 – 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Dash et al. US 2020/0314872 A1, hereinafter Dash in view of Narayanan et al. US11678197, hereinafter Narayanan.
Regarding claim 1, Dash teaches a method comprising:
(Dash: para. [0099] and 600 may be performed by any suitable system, apparatus, or device. For example, the wireless communication device 108 of FIG. 1. Para. [0119] Computer-executable instructions may include, for example, instructions and data which cause a general-purpose computer, special-purpose computer, or special-purpose processing device (e.g., one or more processors) to perform or control performance of a certain function or group of functions)
receiving, from a first device, a first communication using a first protocol;
(Dash: para. [0100] and Fig. 6 block 602, at which a first set of one or more parameters of communication between a first radio and a first STA may be detected. the first set of one or more parameters may be detected on a set of one or more overlapping channels. In these and other implementations, the first radio may be configured to communicate with the first STA according to a first communication protocol)
receiving, from a second device, a second communication using a second protocol;
(Dash: para. [0101] and Fig. 6 block 604, a second set of one or more parameters of communication between a second radio and a second STA may be detected. In some implementations, the second set of one or more parameters may be detected on the set of one or more overlapping channels. In these and other implementations, the second radio may be configured to communicate with the second STA according to a second communication protocol that is different than the first communication protocol)
determining, based on the received first and second communications, values for one or more parameters relating to the first protocol and values for one or more parameters relating to the second protocol;
(Dash: para. [0100] and Fig. 6 block 602, at which a first set of one or more parameters (corresponds to claim limitation “values for one or more parameters relating to the first protocol”) of communication between a first radio and a first STA may be detected. Para. [0101] and Fig. 6 block 604, a second set of one or more parameters (corresponds to claim limitation “values for one or more parameters relating to the second protocol”) of communication between a second radio and a second STA may be detected. Para. [0058] CMC 426 may control channel access based on an operation mode priority. the CMC 426 may determine the operation mode of the WLAN 425, the cellular network 427, and/or the WPAN 429 based on the information extracted and/or derived from the preambles. the CMC 426 may control channel access to prioritize a particular operation mode (e.g., a particular protocol) over other operation modes. For example, the operation mode priority may indicate that a Wi-Fi operation mode has a higher priority than a cellular or a Bluetooth operation mode)
determining, based on the determined values for the one or more first parameters and the determined values for the one or more second parameters, that one of the first or second communication protocols should be prioritized; and
(Dash: para. [0102] and Fig. 6 block 606, the first of one or more parameters may be compared with the second set of one or more parameters. For example, the planned traffic for the first wireless network may be compared to the planned traffic for the second wireless network. As another example, a packet type on the first wireless network may be compared to a packet type on the second wireless network. Para. [0058] CMC 426 may control channel access based on an operation mode priority. In these and other implementations, the CMC 426 may determine the operation mode of the WLAN 425, the cellular network 427, and/or the WPAN 429 based on the information extracted and/or derived from the preambles. In some implementations, the CMC 426 may control channel access to prioritize a particular operation mode (e.g., a particular protocol) over other operation modes B (corresponds to claim limitation “one of the first or second communication protocols should be prioritized”). For example, the operation mode priority may indicate that a Wi-Fi operation mode has a higher priority than a cellular or a Bluetooth operation mode.)
enabling, based on the determined values for the one or more first parameters and the determined values for the one or more second parameters, packet traffic arbitration (PTA), wherein the enabling PTA comprises reallocating transmission resources for one of the first or second communications.
(Dash: para. [0055 & 0058 & 0103] the CMC 426 may at least partially control channel access for the WLAN 425, the cellular network 427, and the WPAN 429 based on the comparison of the first set of parameters, the second set of parameters, and the third set of parameters (corresponds to claim limitation “based on the determined values”). para. [0103] block 608, how the first radio communicates on the first set of channels and how the second radio communicates on the second set of channels may be directed (corresponds to claim limitation “enabling PTA comprises reallocating transmission resources for one of the first or second communications”). For example, the CMC 426 may reserve particular shared channels for communication within the first wireless network. As another example, the CMC 426 may instruct the second radio to stop transmitting and instruct the first radio to start transmitting on particular shared channels. Para. [0021 & 0020] For the packet traffic arbitration solution, a PTA circuit may authorize all transmissions on the shared channels by the radios)
It is noted that Dash does not explicitly disclose: receiving, by a wireless gateway and from a first device, a first communication using a first protocol; receiving, by the wireless gateway and from a second device, a second communication using a second protocol.
However, Narayanan from the same or similar fields of endeavor teaches the use of: receiving, by a wireless gateway and from a first device, a first communication using a first protocol; receiving, by the wireless gateway and from a second device, a second communication using a second protocol. (Narayanan: Col. 11 lines 60-65 an access point 200, such as access point 110-1 in FIG. 1 . Access point 200 may include an embedded IoT gateway and may provide a sensor management platform that is programmable and that can be easily integrated with existing management solutions. Abstract and Col. 9 lines 16-26 packet-traffic arbitration between radios 120-1 and 120-2 may be used. In particular, when one of the radios is transmitting or receiving using a channel and a first communication protocol, it may communicate a hold (such as a hold signal or instruction) to the other radio, so that the other radio temporarily does not communicate using the channel and a second communication protocol) Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use the teaching of Narayanan in the method of Dash. One of ordinary skill in the art would be motivated to do so for communication technique may facilitate concurrent communication between the electronic device and one or more other electronic devices using the communication protocol and the other communication protocol. Consequently, the communication technique may improve the communication performance (such as reduced latency and interference) of the electronic device, which may improve the user experience when communicating using the electronic device and, more generally, may enable the IoT (Narayanan: Col. 5 lines 40-50).
Regarding claim 2, Dash and Narayanan teach the method of claim 1, wherein determining values for the one or more parameters relating to the first protocol comprises determining values for one or more of: a data unit queue size associated with the first protocol; a received signal strength indicator (RSSI) level associated with the first protocol; a quantity of transmission success reports for the first protocol; and a modulation coding scheme rate associated with the first protocol. (Dash: para. [0056] information extracted and/or derived from the preamble may include bandwidth occupied by the packet, length of the packet, modulation and coding scheme (MCS) of the packet).
Dash does not teach: a data unit queue size associated with the first protocol; a received signal strength indicator (RSSI) level associated with the first protocol; a quantity of transmission success reports for the first protocol.
However, Narayanan from the same or similar fields of endeavor teaches the use of: a received signal strength indicator (RSSI) level associated with the first protocol; (Narayanan: col. 8 lines 15-30 a variety of performance metrics, such as: a received signal strength (RSSI)) a quantity of transmission success reports for the first protocol; and (Narayanan: col. 8 lines 15-30 ratio of number of bytes successfully communicated during a time interval (such as 1-10 s) to an estimated maximum number of bytes that can be communicated in the time interval (the latter of which is sometimes referred to as the ‘capacity’ of a communication channel or link)) Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use the teaching of Narayanan in the method of Dash. One of ordinary skill in the art would be motivated to do so for communication technique may facilitate concurrent communication between the electronic device and one or more other electronic devices using the communication protocol and the other communication protocol. Consequently, the communication technique may improve the communication performance (such as reduced latency and interference) of the electronic device, which may improve the user experience when communicating using the electronic device and, more generally, may enable the IoT (Narayanan: Col. 5 lines 40-50).
Regarding claim 3, Dash and Narayanan teach the method of claim 1, wherein determining values for the one or more parameters relating to the second protocol comprises determining a packet type associated with the second protocol. (Dash: para. [0100] and Fig. 6 block 602, at which a first set of one or more parameters of communication between a first radio and a first STA may be detected. Para. [0101] and Fig. 6 block 604, a second set of one or more parameters (corresponds to claim limitation “values for one or more parameters relating to the second protocol”) of communication between a second radio and a second STA may be detected. Para. [0058] CMC 426 may control channel access based on an operation mode priority. the CMC 426 may determine the operation mode of the WLAN 425, the cellular network 427, and/or the WPAN 429 based on the information extracted and/or derived from the preambles. the CMC 426 may control channel access to prioritize a particular operation mode (e.g., a particular protocol) over other operation modes. For example, the operation mode priority may indicate that a Wi-Fi operation mode has a higher priority than a cellular or a Bluetooth operation mode)
Regarding claim 4, Dash and Narayanan teach the method of claim 1, Dash does not teach: wherein determining values for the one or more parameters relating to the second protocol comprises determining values for one or more of: an RSSI level associated with the second protocol; a quantity of transmission success reports for the second protocol; and a signal to noise ratio.
However, Narayanan from the same or similar fields of endeavor teaches the use of: a wherein determining values for the one or more parameters relating to the second protocol comprises determining values for one or more of: an RSSI level associated with the second protocol; (Narayanan: col. 8 lines 15-30 a variety of performance metrics, such as: a received signal strength (RSSI)) a quantity of transmission success reports for the second protocol; (Narayanan: col. 8 lines 15-30 ratio of number of bytes successfully communicated during a time interval (such as 1-10 s) to an estimated maximum number of bytes that can be communicated in the time interval (the latter of which is sometimes referred to as the ‘capacity’ of a communication channel or link)) and a signal to noise ratio (Narayanan: col. 8 lines 15-30 a signal-to-noise ratio) Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use the teaching of Narayanan in the method of Dash. One of ordinary skill in the art would be motivated to do so for communication technique may facilitate concurrent communication between the electronic device and one or more other electronic devices using the communication protocol and the other communication protocol. Consequently, the communication technique may improve the communication performance (such as reduced latency and interference) of the electronic device, which may improve the user experience when communicating using the electronic device and, more generally, may enable the IoT (Narayanan: Col. 5 lines 40-50).
Regarding claim 5, Dash and Narayanan teach the method of claim 1, lower bandwidth, (Dash: para. [0065] CMC 426 may determine which shared channels include extra bandwidth based on the antenna configuration of the first set of antennas, the second set of antennas, and/or the third set of antennas. For example, a range of channels where interference is allowable may depend on the beamforming patterns and antenna isolation, which may be used to determine a part of the bandwidth that may be available for use by other radios. In addition, the CMC 426 may instruct the WLAN radio 424, the cellular radio 428, and/or the WPAN radio 430 to transmit on a particular shared channel that includes extra bandwidth based on the antenna configurations)
Dash does not teach: wherein the second wireless protocol is associated with one or more of lower power consumption, and less stable frequencies when compared to the first wireless protocol.
However, Narayanan from the same or similar fields of endeavor teaches the use of: a wherein the second wireless protocol is associated with one or more of lower power consumption (Narayanan: col. 6 lines 56 to col. 7 line 9 and col. 16 lines 44-48 Bluetooth low energy or BLE (from the Bluetooth Special Interest Group of Kirkland, Wash.), Zigbee (from the Zigbee Alliance of Davis, Calif.), Z-Wave (from Sigma Designs, Inc. of Fremont, Calif.), LoRaWAN (from the Lora Alliance of Beaverton, Oreg.), Thread (from the Thread Group of San Ramon, Calif.), IPv6 over low-power wireless personal area networks or 6LoWPAN (from the Internet Engineering Taskforce of Fremont, Calif.)), lower bandwidth, and less stable frequencies when compared to the first wireless protocol. Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use the teaching of Narayanan in the method of Dash. One of ordinary skill in the art would be motivated to do so for communication technique may facilitate concurrent communication between the electronic device and one or more other electronic devices using the communication protocol and the other communication protocol. Consequently, the communication technique may improve the communication performance (such as reduced latency and interference) of the electronic device, which may improve the user experience when communicating using the electronic device and, more generally, may enable the IoT (Narayanan: Col. 5 lines 40-50).
Regarding claim 6, Dash and Narayanan teach the method of claim 4, Dash does not explicitly teaches: wherein the determining the RSSI levels associated with the second protocol further comprises determining, by the wireless gateway, RSSI levels associated with the second protocol.
However, Narayanan from the same or similar fields of endeavor teaches the use of: a wherein the determining the RSSI levels associated with the second protocol further comprises determining, by the wireless gateway, RSSI levels associated with the second protocol (Narayanan: col. 8 lines 15-30 a variety of performance metrics, such as: a received signal strength (RSSI)) Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use the teaching of Narayanan in the method of Dash. One of ordinary skill in the art would be motivated to do so for communication technique may facilitate concurrent communication between the electronic device and one or more other electronic devices using the communication protocol and the other communication protocol. Consequently, the communication technique may improve the communication performance (such as reduced latency and interference) of the electronic device, which may improve the user experience when communicating using the electronic device and, more generally, may enable the IoT (Narayanan: Col. 5 lines 40-50).
Regarding claim 8, Dash and Narayanan teach the method of claim 1, wherein the determining to enable the use of PTA
(Dash: para. [0055 & 0058 & 0103] the CMC 426 may at least partially control channel access for the WLAN 425, the cellular network 427, and the WPAN 429 based on the comparison of the first set of parameters, the second set of parameters, and the third set of parameters. para. [0103] block 608, how the first radio communicates on the first set of channels and how the second radio communicates on the second set of channels may be directed (corresponds to claim limitation “enable the use of PTA”). For example, the CMC 426 may reserve particular shared channels for communication within the first wireless network. As another example, the CMC 426 may instruct the second radio to stop transmitting and instruct the first radio to start transmitting on particular shared channels. Para. [0021 & 0020] For the packet traffic arbitration solution, a PTA circuit may authorize all transmissions on the shared channels by the radios)
Dash does not explicitly teach: further comprises determining that a predetermined threshold is satisfied based on the determined values.
Narayanan from the same or similar fields of endeavor teaches: wherein the determining to enable the use of PTA further comprises determining that a predetermined threshold is satisfied based on the determined values. (Narayanan: col. 9 lines 37 to col. 10 line 3 and col. 6 lines 1-15 access point 110-1 may access a stored data structure with characteristics of different electronic devices, and using the MAC address may determine that electronic device 112-1 is battery powered with low priority (corresponds to claim limitation “determined values”) and/or has a low frequency of or long-time intervals between communications with access point 110-1. Consequently, access point 110-1 may assign traffic associated with electronic device 112-1 to a lower latency queue (corresponds to claim limitation “predetermined threshold is satisfied”). On the other hand, if access point 110-1 determined that electronic device 112-1 is not battery powered, has a high priority (such as a smoke or carbon-monoxide detector, a burglar alarm, etc.) and/or that it has a high frequency of or short-time intervals between communications with access point 110-1, access point 110-1 may assign traffic associated with electronic device 112-1 to a higher latency queue) Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use the teaching of Narayanan in the method of Dash. One of ordinary skill in the art would be motivated to do so for communication technique may facilitate concurrent communication between the electronic device and one or more other electronic devices using the communication protocol and the other communication protocol. Consequently, the communication technique may improve the communication performance (such as reduced latency and interference) of the electronic device, which may improve the user experience when communicating using the electronic device and, more generally, may enable the IoT (Narayanan: Col. 5 lines 40-50).
Regarding claim 9, Dash and Narayanan teach the method of claim 1, further comprising determining, based on receiving updated values for the parameters (Dash: para. [0116] changing operation of the second radio in the second wireless network from the power save operating mode to a normal operating mode to receive the second traffic from the client device), to disable the use of PTA. (Dash: para. [0055 & 0058 & 0103] the CMC 426 may at least partially control channel access for the WLAN 425, the cellular network 427, and the WPAN 429 based on the comparison of the first set of parameters, the second set of parameters, and the third set of parameters. para. [0103] block 608, how the first radio communicates on the first set of channels and how the second radio communicates on the second set of channels may be directed. For example, the CMC 426 may reserve particular shared channels for communication within the first wireless network. As another example, the CMC 426 may instruct the second radio to stop transmitting (corresponds to claim limitation “disable the use of PTA”) and instruct the first radio to start transmitting on particular shared channels. Para. [0021 & 0020] For the packet traffic arbitration solution, a PTA circuit may authorize all transmissions on the shared channels by the radios)
Regarding claim 10, Dash and Narayanan teach the method of claim 9, wherein after PTA is disabled, PTA remains enabled for one or more essential devices. (Dash: para. [0055 & 0058 & 0103] the CMC 426 may at least partially control channel access for the WLAN 425, the cellular network 427, and the WPAN 429 based on the comparison of the first set of parameters, the second set of parameters, and the third set of parameters. para. [0103] block 608, how the first radio communicates on the first set of channels and how the second radio communicates on the second set of channels may be directed. For example, the CMC 426 may reserve particular shared channels for communication within the first wireless network. As another example, the CMC 426 may instruct the second radio to stop transmitting (corresponds to claim limitation “PTA is disabled”) and instruct the first radio to start transmitting on particular shared channels (corresponds to claim limitation “PTA remains enabled”). Para. [0021 & 0020] For the packet traffic arbitration solution, a PTA circuit may authorize all transmissions on the shared channels by the radios)
Regarding claim 11, Dash and Narayanan teach the method of claim 1, further comprising determining, based on receiving, from the second device, a predetermined the packet type associated with the second protocol, to stop using PTA. (Dash: para. [0055 & 0058 & 0103] the CMC 426 may at least partially control channel access for the WLAN 425, the cellular network 427, and the WPAN 429 based on the comparison of the first set of parameters, the second set of parameters, and the third set of parameters. para. [0103] block 608, how the first radio communicates on the first set of channels and how the second radio communicates on the second set of channels may be directed. For example, the CMC 426 may reserve particular shared channels for communication within the first wireless network. As another example, the CMC 426 may instruct the second radio to stop transmitting (corresponds to claim limitation “PTA is disabled”) and instruct the first radio to start transmitting on particular shared channels (corresponds to claim limitation “PTA remains enabled”). Para. [0021 & 0020] For the packet traffic arbitration solution, a PTA circuit may authorize all transmissions on the shared channels by the radios)
Dash does not explicitly teaches: a predetermined quantity of the packet type associated with the second protocol.
However, Narayanan the same or similar fields of endeavor teaches: a predetermined quantity of the packet type associated with the second protocol. (Narayanan: col. 8 lines 15-30 a ratio of an actual data rate to an estimated data rate (which is sometimes referred to as ‘utilization’) Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use the teaching of Narayanan in the method of Dash. One of ordinary skill in the art would be motivated to do so for communication technique may facilitate concurrent communication between the electronic device and one or more other electronic devices using the communication protocol and the other communication protocol. Consequently, the communication technique may improve the communication performance (such as reduced latency and interference) of the electronic device, which may improve the user experience when communicating using the electronic device and, more generally, may enable the IoT (Narayanan: Col. 5 lines 40-50).
Regarding claim 12, Dash and Narayanan teach the method of claim 1, Dash does not explicitly teach: wherein the receiving further comprises receiving, by a second wireless gateway in a second premises, the one or more first communications and the one or more second communications; and wherein the determining to enable the use of packet traffic arbitration further comprises determining, by the second wireless gateway, to use PTA.
However, Narayanan the same or similar fields of endeavor teaches: wherein the receiving further comprises receiving, by a second wireless gateway in a second premises, the one or more first communications and the one or more second communications; and wherein the determining to enable the use of packet traffic arbitration further comprises determining, by the second wireless gateway, to use PTA (Narayanan: Col. 11 lines 60-65 an access point 200, such as access point 110-1 and 110-2 (corresponds to claim limitation “second wireless gateway”) in FIG. 1 . Access point 200 may include an embedded IoT gateway and may provide a sensor management platform that is programmable and that can be easily integrated with existing management solutions. Abstract and Col. 9 lines 16-26 packet-traffic arbitration between radios 120-1 and 120-2 may be used. In particular, when one of the radios is transmitting or receiving using a channel and a first communication protocol (corresponds to claim limitation “enable the use of packet traffic arbitration”), it may communicate a hold (such as a hold signal or instruction) to the other radio, so that the other radio temporarily does not communicate using the channel and a second communication protocol) Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use the teaching of Narayanan in the method of Dash. One of ordinary skill in the art would be motivated to do so for communication technique may facilitate concurrent communication between the electronic device and one or more other electronic devices using the communication protocol and the other communication protocol. Consequently, the communication technique may improve the communication performance (such as reduced latency and interference) of the electronic device, which may improve the user experience when communicating using the electronic device and, more generally, may enable the IoT (Narayanan: Col. 5 lines 40-50).
Regarding claim 15, Dash teaches a method comprising:
(Dash: para. [0099] and 600 may be performed by any suitable system, apparatus, or device. For example, the wireless communication device 108 of FIG. 1. Para. [0119] Computer-executable instructions may include, for example, instructions and data which cause a general-purpose computer, special-purpose computer, or special-purpose processing device (e.g., one or more processors) to perform or control performance of a certain function or group of functions)
receiving, from a first device, a first communication using a first protocol;
(Dash: para. [0100] and Fig. 6 block 602, at which a first set of one or more parameters of communication between a first radio and a first STA may be detected. the first set of one or more parameters may be detected on a set of one or more overlapping channels. In these and other implementations, the first radio may be configured to communicate with the first STA according to a first communication protocol)
receiving, from a second device, a second communication using a second protocol;
(Dash: para. [0101] and Fig. 6 block 604, a second set of one or more parameters of communication between a second radio and a second STA may be detected. In some implementations, the second set of one or more parameters may be detected on the set of one or more overlapping channels. In these and other implementations, the second radio may be configured to communicate with the second STA according to a second communication protocol that is different than the first communication protocol)
determining, based on the received first and second communications, values for one or more parameters relating to the first protocol and values for one or more parameters relating to the second protocol;
(Dash: para. [0100] and Fig. 6 block 602, at which a first set of one or more parameters (corresponds to claim limitation “values for one or more parameters relating to the first protocol”) of communication between a first radio and a first STA may be detected. Para. [0101] and Fig. 6 block 604, a second set of one or more parameters (corresponds to claim limitation “values for one or more parameters relating to the second protocol”) of communication between a second radio and a second STA may be detected. Para. [0058] CMC 426 may control channel access based on an operation mode priority. the CMC 426 may determine the operation mode of the WLAN 425, the cellular network 427, and/or the WPAN 429 based on the information extracted and/or derived from the preambles. the CMC 426 may control channel access to prioritize a particular operation mode (e.g., a particular protocol) over other operation modes. For example, the operation mode priority may indicate that a Wi-Fi operation mode has a higher priority than a cellular or a Bluetooth operation mode)
determining, based on the determined values for the one or more first parameters and the determined values for the one or more second parameters, that one of the first or second communication protocols should be prioritized; and
(Dash: para. [0102] and Fig. 6 block 606, the first of one or more parameters may be compared with the second set of one or more parameters. For example, the planned traffic for the first wireless network may be compared to the planned traffic for the second wireless network. As another example, a packet type on the first wireless network may be compared to a packet type on the second wireless network. Para. [0058] CMC 426 may control channel access based on an operation mode priority. In these and other implementations, the CMC 426 may determine the operation mode of the WLAN 425, the cellular network 427, and/or the WPAN 429 based on the information extracted and/or derived from the preambles. In some implementations, the CMC 426 may control channel access to prioritize a particular operation mode (e.g., a particular protocol) over other operation modes B (corresponds to claim limitation “one of the first or second communication protocols should be prioritized”). For example, the operation mode priority may indicate that a Wi-Fi operation mode has a higher priority than a cellular or a Bluetooth operation mode.)
disabling, based on the determining that the first communication protocol should be prioritized, packet traffic arbitration (PTA), wherein the disabling PTA comprises reallocating transmission resources for the first communication (Dash: para. [0055 & 0058 & 0103] the CMC 426 may at least partially control channel access for the WLAN 425, the cellular network 427, and the WPAN 429 based on the comparison of the first set of parameters, the second set of parameters, and the third set of parameters (corresponds to claim limitation “based on the determined values”). para. [0103] block 608, how the first radio communicates on the first set of channels and how the second radio communicates on the second set of channels may be directed. For example, the CMC 426 may reserve particular shared channels for communication within the first wireless network. As another example, the CMC 426 may instruct the second radio to stop transmitting (corresponds to claim limitation “disabling PTA comprises reallocating transmission resources for one of the first or second communications”) and instruct the first radio to start transmitting on particular shared channels. Para. [0021 & 0020] For the packet traffic arbitration solution, a PTA circuit may authorize all transmissions on the shared channels by the radios)
It is noted that Dash does not explicitly disclose: receiving, by a wireless gateway and from a first device, a first communication using a first protocol; receiving, by the wireless gateway and from a second device, a second communication using a second protocol.
However, Narayanan from the same or similar fields of endeavor teaches the use of: receiving, by a wireless gateway and from a first device, a first communication using a first protocol; receiving, by the wireless gateway and from a second device, a second communication using a second protocol. (Narayanan: Col. 11 lines 60-65 an access point 200, such as access point 110-1 in FIG. 1 . Access point 200 may include an embedded IoT gateway and may provide a sensor management platform that is programmable and that can be easily integrated with existing management solutions. Abstract and Col. 9 lines 16-26 packet-traffic arbitration between radios 120-1 and 120-2 may be used. In particular, when one of the radios is transmitting or receiving using a channel and a first communication protocol, it may communicate a hold (such as a hold signal or instruction) to the other radio, so that the other radio temporarily does not communicate using the channel and a second communication protocol) Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use the teaching of Narayanan in the method of Dash. One of ordinary skill in the art would be motivated to do so for communication technique may facilitate concurrent communication between the electronic device and one or more other electronic devices using the communication protocol and the other communication protocol. Consequently, the communication technique may improve the communication performance (such as reduced latency and interference) of the electronic device, which may improve the user experience when communicating using the electronic device and, more generally, may enable the IoT (Narayanan: Col. 5 lines 40-50).
Regarding claims 16-17, Dash and Narayanan teach all the limitations as discussed in the rejection of claims 2 and 8, and therefore method claims 16-17 are rejected using the same rationales.
Regarding claim 18, Dash teaches a method comprising:
(Dash: para. [0099] and 600 may be performed by any suitable system, apparatus, or device. For example, the wireless communication device 108 of FIG. 1. Para. [0119] Computer-executable instructions may include, for example, instructions and data which cause a general-purpose computer, special-purpose computer, or special-purpose processing device (e.g., one or more processors) to perform or control performance of a certain function or group of functions)
receiving, configured to receive via first and second wireless protocols, one or more first communications via the first wireless protocol from one or more first devices;
(Dash: para. [0101] and Fig. 6 block 604, a second set of one or more parameters of communication between a second radio and a second STA may be detected. In some implementations, the second set of one or more parameters may be detected on the set of one or more overlapping channels. In these and other implementations, the second radio may be configured to communicate with the second STA according to a second communication protocol that is different than the first communication protocol)
receiving, one or more second communications via the second wireless protocol from one or more second devices; and (Dash: para. [0101] and Fig. 6 block 604, a second set of one or more parameters of communication between a second radio and a second STA may be detected. In some implementations, the second set of one or more parameters may be detected on the set of one or more overlapping channels. In these and other implementations, the second radio may be configured to communicate with the second STA according to a second communication protocol that is different than the first communication protocol)
determining, based on the received one or more first communications and the received one or more second communications, and based on values for predetermined parameters (Dash: para. [0102] and Fig. 6 block 606, the first of one or more parameters may be compared with the second set of one or more parameters. For example, the planned traffic for the first wireless network may be compared to the planned traffic for the second wireless network. As another example, a packet type on the first wireless network may be compared to a packet type on the second wireless network. Para. [0058] CMC 426 may control channel access based on an operation mode priority. In these and other implementations, the CMC 426 may determine the operation mode of the WLAN 425, the cellular network 427, and/or the WPAN 429 based on the information extracted and/or derived from the preambles. In some implementations, the CMC 426 may control channel access to prioritize a particular operation mode (e.g., a particular protocol) over other operation modes B. For example, the operation mode priority may indicate that a Wi-Fi operation mode has a higher priority than a cellular or a Bluetooth operation mode.), to communicate via the first protocol and the second protocol without packet traffic arbitration (PTA). (Dash: para. [0055 & 0058 & 0103] the CMC 426 may at least partially control channel access for the WLAN 425, the cellular network 427, and the WPAN 429 based on the comparison of the first set of parameters, the second set of parameters, and the third set of parameters (corresponds to claim limitation “based on the determined values”). para. [0103] block 608, how the first radio communicates on the first set of channels and how the second radio communicates on the second set of channels may be directed (corresponds to claim limitation “enabling PTA comprises reallocating transmission resources for one of the first or second communications”). For example, the CMC 426 may reserve particular shared channels for communication within the first wireless network. As another example, the CMC 426 may instruct the second radio to stop transmitting (corresponds to claim limitation “second protocol without packet traffic arbitration (PTA)”) and instruct the first radio to start transmitting on particular shared channels (corresponds to claim limitation “communicate via the first protocol”). Para. [0021 & 0020] For the packet traffic arbitration solution, a PTA circuit may authorize all transmissions on the shared channels by the radios)
It is noted that Dash does not explicitly disclose: receiving, by a wireless gateway configured to receive via first and second wireless protocols; receiving, by the wireless gateway, one or more second communications via the second wireless protocol.
However, Narayanan from the same or similar fields of endeavor teaches the use of: receiving, by a wireless gateway configured to receive via first and second wireless protocols; receiving, by the wireless gateway, one or more second communications via the second wireless protocol (Narayanan: Col. 11 lines 60-65 an access point 200, such as access point 110-1 in FIG. 1 . Access point 200 may include an embedded IoT gateway and may provide a sensor management platform that is programmable and that can be easily integrated with existing management solutions. Abstract and Col. 9 lines 16-26 packet-traffic arbitration between radios 120-1 and 120-2 may be used. In particular, when one of the radios is transmitting or receiving using a channel and a first communication protocol, it may communicate a hold (such as a hold signal or instruction) to the other radio, so that the other radio temporarily does not communicate using the channel and a second communication protocol) Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use the teaching of Narayanan in the method of Dash. One of ordinary skill in the art would be motivated to do so for communication technique may facilitate concurrent communication between the electronic device and one or more other electronic devices using the communication protocol and the other communication protocol. Consequently, the communication technique may improve the communication performance (such as reduced latency and interference) of the electronic device, which may improve the user experience when communicating using the electronic device and, more generally, may enable the IoT (Narayanan: Col. 5 lines 40-50).
Regarding claims 19-20, Dash and Narayanan teach all the limitations as discussed in the rejection of claims 2 and 5, and therefore method claims 19-20 are rejected using the same rationales.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 7, 13 and 14 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.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Please also see PTO-892.
Alexandre et al. US 20090116437 A1 teaches Enhanced arbitration entity is aware of the 4 real time points (POINT1-POINT4) and the 4 limit curves (FIGS. 9-10), such that the correct combinations of WLAN and BT TX/RX can be allowed or prohibited. E.g. if the WLAN TX/BT TX and WLAN RX/BT RX points are within the AFH limits, while the WLAN RX/BT TX and WLAN RX/BT TX fall out of the AFH limits, the PTA is enabled for WLAN RX/BT TX and WLAN RX/BT TX and disabled for WLAN TX/BT TX and WLAN RX/BT RX.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to WUTCHUNG CHU whose telephone number is (571)272-4064. The examiner can normally be reached 10:00 AM - 4:00 PM.
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, Moo R Jeong can be reached at (571) 272-9617. 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.
/WUTCHUNG CHU/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2418