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 .
The present application claims priority to PCT Application CN2021/074813 filed February 2, 2021.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statements filed February 20, 2026 and April 29, 2026 comply with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97, 1.98 and MPEP § 609 and are being considered.
Status
Claims 1, 5, 9, 14, 23-26, and 28-30 were amended.
Claim 18 was canceled.
Claims 1-17 and 19-30 are currently pending.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
The factual inquiries 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 1-10 and 12-17 and 19-30 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over U.S. Pat. Pub. 20200413442 to Anantharaman Balsubramanian et al. (hereinafter Balsubramanian) in view of U.S. Pat. Pub. 20200127775 to Honjia Su et al. (hereinafter Su) further in view of U.S. Pat. Pub. 20230188257 to Philippe Le Bars et al. (hereinafter Le Bars).
Regarding claim 1, Balsubramanian in view of Su further in view of Le Bars teaches A method for wireless communication at a user equipment (UE),comprising:
receiving, as a broadcast from a base station, a plurality of encoded packets associated with a plurality of source packets representing a data set; (Balsubramanian teaches in Fig. 2 a base station (eNB 210) communicates with four UAVs (UEs) over a Uu interface as a group wherein the UAVs are deployed to accomplish a common mission as a group. Paras. [0091] –[0093] teach sidelink assisted downlink broadcast (SADB) for transmission of packets to the group, in which packets lost by one member of the group may be available from another group member. Paras. [0145]- [0146] teach transmitting sets of packets encoded at a network using MPDU sequence numbers wherein “each group member may be assigned to transfer a specific set of packets in each iteration.” Examiner maps the sets of packets for a common mission as a “plurality of source packets representing a data set”).
attempting to recover, [[based at least in part on a failure to decode a threshold quantity of the plurality of encoded packets at the network coding layer,]] the plurality of source packets from the plurality of encoded packets received from the base station; (Balsubramanian teaches Fig. 4 and para. [0136] teaches in step 402 determining packet loss for Uu interface as part of a gNACK determination process between a UAV and a base station. Para. [0137] teaches that the group may know the packet loss of all other members of the encoded packets)
and
transmitting, to a second UE over a sidelink channel and based at least in part on failure by the UE to recover the plurality of source packets representing the data set, a message requesting sidelink assistance in recovering the plurality of source packets representing the data set. (Balsubramanian para. [0090] teaches that group members may obtain lost packets directly from another member using sidelink channels implemented using, e.g. V2V. Balsubramanian para. [0091] teaches that SADB enables a groupcast NACK for packet loss dissemination among group members to enable packet repair among members. Examiner interprets the gNACK as a message requesting sidelink assistance in recovering the plurality of source packets representing the data set as shown in Fig. 2:
PNG
media_image1.png
703
530
media_image1.png
Greyscale
As shown, a set of 4 packets for a common mission are interpreted as the source data needed by the group of UAVs that receive broadcast packets and the gNACK enables recovery of the “lost packets”.)
Although Balsubramanian teaches a “common mission” for which a set of four data packets are deployed to UAVs, Balsubramanian does NOT explicitly teach a “data set” per se.
In the analogous art of 3GPP 5G wireless communications, Su teaches a plurality of source packets representing a data set. (Su para. [0176]-[0178] teaches a “code block group” wherein code blocks in a transport block representing eMBB service data are combined. As shown in Fig. 13, sidelink communications enables the group of CBGs to reach the target user equipment (TUE):
PNG
media_image2.png
885
1105
media_image2.png
Greyscale
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to have combined Balsubramanian with Su to teach a “data set” prior to the effective date of the invention. Each of Balsubramanian and Su are in the field of wireless communications and teach sidelink communications. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to combine Balsubramanian with Su to improve resource usage and efficiency among cooperating groups of user equipment as taught by Su in paras. [0013] to [0018].
Balsubramanian does NOT teach decoding one or more of the plurality of encoded packets at a network coding layer that is between a packet data convergence protocol layer and a radio link control layer in a protocol stack. (Although Balsubramanian teaches in para. [0114] that the decoding of the recovered packets is through the network coding using eNB may choose to form more than one group. In this situation, two or more G-RNTIs may be allocated for each group and its dependent members. Balsubramanian does NOT specifically identify a network coding layer)
However, in the analogous art of 3GPP 5G wireless communications, Le Bars teaches decoding one or more of the plurality of encoded packets at a network coding layer that is between a packet data convergence protocol layer and a radio link control layer in a protocol stack; (Le Bars teaches in para. [0204] implementing a Network Coding scheme at a PDCP sublayer, such that “encoded packets may thus be distributed over several transmission paths associated with several RLC layers/modules in order to increase spatial and frequency diversity.” Further, Le Bars teaches decoding at the network coding layer in Fig. 7b at block 705 “Network Decoding (Data Only)”.
PNG
media_image3.png
969
614
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Examiner notes that applicant’s para. [0091] includes a PDCP sublayer as an Option 2 for the network coding layer. Block 705 is expanded and illustrated as between an upper and a lower layer in Fig. 8:
PNG
media_image4.png
723
1220
media_image4.png
Greyscale
Balsubramanian further does NOT teach that an attempt to recover is “based at least in part on a failure to decode a threshold quantity of the plurality of encoded packets at the network coding layer”.
However, Le Bars teaches an attempt to recover is “based at least in part on a failure to decode a threshold quantity of the plurality of encoded packets at the network coding layer”. (Le Bars teaches in para. [0273] with respect to Fig. 8 of the network coding sublayer, that “it may occur that only one out of four sent PDU is received. In such case, the original SDU has been lost, and a retransmission of the PDU associated with the originally sent SDU may be requested.” Therefore, an attempt to recover is based on a failure to decode at the network coding sublayer.)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective date of the invention to combine Le Bars with Balsubramanian to teach a network coding layer. Each of Le Bars and Balsubramanian are in the field of wireless communications and in network decoding. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to combine Le Bars with Balsubramanian in order to enable improved robustness to data loss with a low impact on the latency as taught in Le Bars para. [0016].
Regarding claim 2, Balsubramanian teaches The method of claim 1, further comprising:
determining that the UE has failed to recover one or more encoded packets of the plurality of encoded packets; (Balsubramanian teaches in para. [0098] packet status information in Table 1 therefore, a UAV would determine packet status by reporting a pre-specified packet order according to packet sequence number and maintains their own packet status information after each user transmits.)
and
including, in the message, a request for the one or more encoded packets. (Balsubramanian Para. [0100] and table 2 that each UAV in a gNACK transmits status information so that the other UAVs know which packets of the set of packets are lost, the gNACK message is equivalent to a request for one or more encoded packets. Fig. 6 illustrates the request procedure:
PNG
media_image5.png
696
1078
media_image5.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 3, Balsubramanian teaches The method of claim 2, further comprising:
including, in the message, an index associated with the data set and one or more indices corresponding to the one or more encoded packets. (Balsubramanian teaches in para. [0097] and table 1, that the packet status information for 6 packets by downlink broadcast for three users. Additionally, para. [0084] teaches that unicast may be used to re-transmit lost packets to members of a broadcast/multicast group and teaches that optimal transmission schemes for packet losses may use “index-coding”.
PNG
media_image6.png
222
591
media_image6.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 4, Balsubramanian teaches The method of claim 1, further comprising: including, in the message, an index associated with the data set and a request for a quantity of encoded packets for recovering the plurality of source packets. (Balsubramanian teaches in para. [0097] and table 1 the packet status information includes information for recovering missing source packets. As shown in table 1, the quantity of encoded packets is also shown (see above).
Regarding claim 5, Balsubramanian in view of Le Bars teaches The method of claim 1, wherein the message comprises a network coding layer report associated with the network coding layer. (Balsubramanian teaches in para. [0093] that the SADB is built “on lower layers such as the packet data convergence protocol (PDCP), the radio link control (RLC), and the media access control/physical (MAC/PHY) layer.”
Although Balsubramanian teaches an SADB that is built on lower layers, Balsubramanian does not explicitly teach a network coding layer.)
But, in the same field of endeavor, Le Bars teaches “comprises a network coding layer report associated with the network coding layer.” (Le Bars teaches a network coding layer as shown above in Fig. 7b, element 703, and further in para. [0273] teaches, with respect to Fig. 8 of the network coding sublayer, that a message may be requested: “In such case, the original SDU has been lost, and a retransmission of the PDU associated with the originally sent SDU may be requested.”)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective date of the invention to combine Le Bars with Balsubramanian to teach a network coding layer. Each of Le Bars and Balsubramanian are in the field of wireless communications and in network decoding. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to combine Le Bars with Balsubramanian in order to enable improved robustness to data loss with a low impact on the latency as taught in Le Bars para. [0016].
Regarding claim 6, Balsubramanian teaches The method of claim 1, further comprising:
receiving, from the second UE responsive to the message, one or more encoded packets associated with the plurality of source packets; (Balsubramanian teaches in Fig. 4, step 406, receiving Uu packet data as a gNACK. Para. [0139]-[0144] and Figs. 5A-5D teach group packet “repair” wherein members of the group with lost packets are given the opportunity to receive lost packets from other group members. For example, Fig. 5C illustrates repairing packet losses of three members simultaneously with a single transmission.)
and
recovering the plurality of source packets based at least in part on receiving the one or more encoded packets. (Balsubramanian Fig. 5C illustrates how each of the group of three UAVs recover all of the source packets 1, 2 and 3 by sidelink transmission:
PNG
media_image7.png
476
354
media_image7.png
Greyscale
)
Regarding claim 7, Balsubramanian teaches The method of claim 6, further comprising:
transmitting sidelink control information that schedules transmission, by the second UE, of the one or more encoded packets. (Balsubramanian teaches in para. [0085] and Fig. 2 above, that an eNB 210 can configure a group radio network temporary identifier (G-RNTI) that enables each member of a group (including transmitting to a second UE) to use D2DN2V sidelink communication to enable one member of a group to receive packets/send packets to another member of the group using sidelink communication.)
Regarding claim 8, Balsubramanian teaches The method of claim 6, further comprising:
receiving sidelink control information that schedules transmission, by the second UE, of the one or more encoded packets. (Balsubramanian teaches in para. [0085] and Fig. 2 above, that an eNB 210 can configure a group radio network temporary identifier (G-RNTI) that enables each member of a group (including receiving from a second UE) to use D2DN2V sidelink communication to enable one member of a group to receive packets/send packets to another member of the group using sidelink communication. Examiner interprets the G-RNTI as sidelink control information.)
Regarding claim 9, Balsubramanian in view of Le Bars teaches The method of claim 6, wherein recovering the plurality of source packets comprises:
decoding, after receiving the one or more encoded packets, the plurality of encoded packets and the one or more encoded packets at the network coding layer. (Balsubramanian teaches in para. [0093] that group members receive recovered encoded packets using an SADB protocol may also be built on lower layers such as the packet data convergence protocol (PDCP), the radio link control (RLC), and the media access control/physical (MAC/PHY) layer. Further, para. [0112] teaches that “in a MAC/PHY layer approach to gNACK, a broadcast/multicast transmission may be associated with a group-specific G-RNTI that the users of a broadcast/multicast group may use to decode the broadcast packets.” Therefore, the packets received over the SADB are decoded at the SADB “layer”.)
But, Balsubramanian does not specifically identify a network coding layer.
In the same field of endeavor, Le Bars teaches decoding “at the network coding layer”. (Le Bars, in Fig. 7b, specifically teaches a network coding sublayer which applicant’s specification para. [0091] includes as an option for a network coding layer, an element 703 as a network coding sublayer taught in para. [0204] as a PDCP sublayer for implementing a network coding/decoding scheme in order to increase spatial and frequency diversity.)
PNG
media_image3.png
969
614
media_image3.png
Greyscale
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective date of the invention to combine Le Bars with Balsubramanian to teach a network coding layer. Each of Le Bars and Balsubramanian are in the field of wireless communications and in network decoding. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to combine Le Bars with Balsubramanian in order to enable improved robustness to data loss with a low impact on the latency as taught in Le Bars para. [0016].
Regarding claim 10, Balsubramanian teaches The method of claim 1, wherein transmitting the message requesting sidelink assistance further comprises:
transmitting the message as a unicast transmission to the second UE, the method further comprising; (Balsubramanian teaches in paras. [0075]- [0080] a File Delivery over Unidirectional Transport (FLUTE) protocol that enables UAVs with a central controlling UAV to use sidelink communications to communicate with other UAVs. “It may not be possible to guarantee error free reception over FLUTE. Accordingly, unicast schemes may be used to recover lost packets.”)
receiving, from a third UE different from the second UE, responsive to the message, one or more encoded packets associated with the plurality of source packets; (Balsubramanian teaches in paras. [0158]-[0162] that “Any member of a group with the GRNTI may generate a gNACK for the common packet loss experienced by the group. “As shown in Figs. 5A-5D, each member of the UAV group can be “repaired” simultaneously by receiving lost packets simultaneously.)
and
recovering the plurality of source packets based at least in part on receiving the one or more encoded packets. (Balsubramanian teaches that the plurality of packets are recovered via a “repair” process as shown in Fig. 6 wherein the packets are recovered:
PNG
media_image8.png
728
1126
media_image8.png
Greyscale
As shown in Fig. 2, above, the repair is complete when each of the packets of the group of packets needed by the UAVs is received as shown by the check marks.)
Regarding claim 12, Balsubramanian teaches The method of claim 1, further comprising: receiving, from the second UE responsive to the message, a second message indicating that the second UE is not able to assist the UE with recovering the plurality of source packets. (Balsubramanian para. [0090]-[0091] teaches a “groupcast” gNACK which enables the UAVs to identify which packets are were not received and not available over sidelink from another UAV.)
Regarding claim 13, Balsubramanian teaches The method of claim 1, wherein the message is broadcast, groupcast, or unicast. (Balsubramanian para. [0091] teaches Sidelink Assisted Downlink Broadcast (SABR) which enables each UAV to “groupcast” messages and packet loss dissemination among the group of UAVs.)
Regarding claim 14, Balsubramanian in view of Su and Le Bars teaches A method for wireless communication at a user equipment (UE),comprising:
receiving, as a broadcast from a base station, a plurality of encoded packets associated with a plurality of source packets representing a data set; (Balsubramanian teaches in Fig. 2 a base station (eNB 210) communicates with four UAVs over a Uu interface as a group wherein the UAVs are deployed to accomplish a common mission as a group. Paras. [0091] –[0093] teach sidelink assisted downlink broadcast (SADB) for transmission of packets to the group, in which packets lost by one member of the group may be available from another group member. Paras. [0145]- [0146] teach transmitting sets of packets encoded at a network using MPDU sequence numbers wherein “each group member may be assigned to transfer a specific set of packets in each iteration.” Examiner maps the sets of packets for a common mission as a “plurality of source packets representing a data set”).
receiving, from a second UE over a sidelink channel, a first message requesting sidelink assistance in recovering the plurality of source packets; (Balsubramanian para. [0090] teaches that group members may obtain lost packets directly from another member using sidelink channels implemented using, e.g. V2V. Balsubramanian para. [0091] teaches that SADB enables a groupcast NACK for packet loss dissemination among group members to enable packet repair among members. Examiner interprets the gNACK as a message requesting sidelink assistance in recovering the plurality of source packets representing the data set as shown in Fig. 2:
PNG
media_image1.png
703
530
media_image1.png
Greyscale
As shown a set of 4 packets are interpreted as the source data needed by the group of UAVs that receive broadcast packets and the gNACK enables recovery of the “lost packets”.)
and
transmitting, to the second UE responsive to the first message, [[and based at least in part on decoding at least a threshold quantity of the plurality of encoded packets at the network coding layer]], a second message indicative of an ability of the UE to assist the second UE with recovering the plurality of source packets. (Balsubramanian teaches Fig. 4 and para. [0136] teaches in step 402 determining packet loss for Uu interface as part of a gNACK determination process between a UAV and a base station. Para. [0137] teaches that the group may know the packet loss of all other members of the encoded packets)
Although Balsubramanian teaches a “common mission” for which a set of four data packets are deployed to UAVs, Balsubramanian does NOT explicitly teach a “data set” per se.
In the analogous art of 3GPP 5G wireless communications, Su teaches a plurality of source packets representing a data set. (Su para. [0176]-[0178] teaches a “code block group” wherein code blocks in a transport block representing eMBB service data are combined. As shown in Fig. 13, sidelink communications enables the group of CBGs to reach the target user equipment (TUE):
PNG
media_image2.png
885
1105
media_image2.png
Greyscale
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to have combined Balsubramanian with Su to teach a “data set” prior to the effective date of the invention. Each of Balsubramanian and Su are in the field of wireless communications and teach sidelink communications. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to combine Balsubramanian with Su to improve resource usage and efficiency among cooperating groups of user equipment as taught by Su in paras. [0013] to [0018].
Balsubramanian does NOT teach decoding the plurality of encoded packets at a network coding layer that is between a packet data convergence protocol layer and a radio link control layer in a protocol stack. (Although Balsubramanian teaches in para. [0114] that the decoding of the recovered packets is through the network coding using eNB may choose to form more than one group. In this situation, two or more G-RNTIs may be allocated for each group and its dependent members. Balsubramanian does NOT specifically identify a network coding layer)
However, in the analogous art of 3GPP 5G wireless communications, Le Bars teaches decoding one or more of the plurality of encoded packets at a network coding layer that is between a packet data convergence protocol layer and a radio link control layer in a protocol stack; (Le Bars teaches in para. [0204] implementing a Network Coding scheme at a PDCP sublayer, such that “encoded packets may thus be distributed over several transmission paths associated with several RLC layers/modules in order to increase spatial and frequency diversity.” Further, Le Bars teaches decoding at the network coding layer in Fig. 7b at block 705 “Network Decoding (Data Only)”.
PNG
media_image3.png
969
614
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Examiner notes that applicant’s para. [0091] includes a PDCP sublayer as an Option 2 for the network coding layer. Block 705 is expanded and illustrated as between an upper and a lower layer in Fig. 8:
PNG
media_image4.png
723
1220
media_image4.png
Greyscale
Balsubramanian further does NOT teach that the transmitting to the second UE responsive to the first message “and based at least in part on a failure to decode a threshold quantity of the plurality of encoded packets at the network coding layer”.
However, Le Bars teaches an attempt to recover is “based at least in part on a failure to decode a threshold quantity of the plurality of encoded packets at the network coding layer”. (Le Bars teaches in para. [0273] with respect to Fig. 8 of the network coding sublayer, that “it may occur that only one out of four sent PDU is received. In such case, the original SDU has been lost, and a retransmission of the PDU associated with the originally sent SDU may be requested.” Therefore, an attempt to recover is based on a failure to decode at the network coding sublayer.)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective date of the invention to combine Le Bars with Balsubramanian to teach a network coding layer. Each of Le Bars and Balsubramanian are in the field of wireless communications and in network decoding. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to combine Le Bars with Balsubramanian in order to enable improved robustness to data loss with a low impact on the latency as taught in Le Bars para. [0016].
Regarding claim 15, Balsubramanian teaches The method of claim 14, wherein the first message includes a request for one or more encoded packets associated with the plurality of source packets, the method further comprising:
including the one or more encoded packets in the second message. (Balsubramanian teaches in Fig. 4, step 406, receiving Uu packet data as a gNACK. Para. [0139]-[0144] and Figs. 5A-5D teach group packet “repair” wherein members of the group with lost packets are given the opportunity to receive lost packets from other group members. For example, Fig. 5C illustrates repairing packet losses of three members simultaneously with a single transmission. The transmission of lost packets are encoded packets.)
Regarding claim 16, Balsubramanian teaches The method of claim 15, wherein the first message includes an index associated with the data set and one or more indices corresponding to the one or more encoded packets. (Balsubramanian teaches in para. [0097] and table 1 the packet status information includes information for recovering missing source packets. As shown in table 1, the quantity of encoded packets is also shown (see table 1 above).
Regarding claim 17, Balsubramanian teaches The method of claim 14, wherein the first message includes an index associated with the data set and a request for a quantity of encoded packets for recovering the plurality of source packets, the method further comprising:
including the quantity of encoded packets in the second message. (Balsubramanian teaches in para. [0084] teaches that unicast may be used to re-transmit lost packets to members of a broadcast/multicast group and teaches that optimal transmission schemes for packet losses may use “index-coding”.
PNG
media_image6.png
222
591
media_image6.png
Greyscale
)
Regarding claim 18, Balsubramanian teaches The method of claim 14, further comprising:
decoding the plurality of encoded packets at a network coding layer which is between a packet data convergence protocol layer and radio link control layer in a protocol stack; (Balsubramanian teaches in para. [0093] that the SADB is built “on lower layers such as the packet data convergence protocol (PDCP), the radio link control (RLC), and the media access control/physical (MAC/PHY) layer.” which Examiner maps to a “network coding layer between a packet data convergence protocol layer and a radio link control layer.)
and
recovering the plurality of source packets associated with the data set based at least in part on decoding the plurality of encoded packets. (Balsubramanian teaches in para. [0114] that the decoding of the recovered packets is through the network coding using eNB may choose to form more than one group. In this situation, two or more G-RNTIs may be allocated for each group and its dependent members.
Regarding claim 19, Balsubramanian teaches The method of claim 14, further comprising:
including, in the second message, one or more encoded packets associated with the plurality of source packets, wherein the one or more encoded packets are scheduled by sidelink control information included in the first message. (Balsubramanian teaches in para. [0085] and Fig. 2 above, that an eNB 210 can configure a group radio network temporary identifier (G-RNTI) that enables each member of a group (including receiving from a second UE) to use D2DN2V sidelink communication to enable one member of a group to receive packets/send packets to another member of the group using sidelink communication. Examiner interprets the G-RNTI as sidelink control information.)
Regarding claim 20, Balsubramanian teaches The method of claim 14, further comprising:
including, in the second message, one or more encoded packets associated with the plurality of source packets;
and
including, in the second message, sidelink control information that schedules transmission of the one or more encoded packets.
Regarding claim 21, Balsubramanian in view of Su teaches The method of claim 14, further comprising:
determining that the UE has failed to recover the plurality of source packets; (Balsubramanian para. [0091] teaches that SADB enables a groupcast NACK (gNACK) for packet loss dissemination among group members to enable packet repair among members.)
and
relaying the first message to a third UE based at least in part on determining that the UE failed to recover the plurality of source packets, wherein the second message comprises an indication of the relay. (Balsubramanian para. [0090] teaches that group members including a third UAV may obtain lost packets directly from another member using sidelink channels implemented using, e.g. V2V. Balsubramanian para. [0091] teaches that SADB enables a groupcast NACK for packet loss dissemination among group members to enable packet repair among members. Examiner interprets the gNACK as a message requesting sidelink assistance in recovering the plurality of source packets representing the data set as shown in Fig. 2, above)
Regarding claim 22, Balsubramanian teaches The method of claim 14, further comprising:
receiving, from a third UE over the sidelink channel, a third message requesting sidelink assistance in recovering the plurality of source packets, wherein the second message is groupcast to the second UE and the third UE based at least in part on the third message. (Balsubramanian teaches groupcast using SADB protocol in para. [0091]. Balsubramanian para. [0136] and Fig. 4 teaches that if a gNACK is not complete, the process may return to step 406 resulting in a third message:
PNG
media_image9.png
610
539
media_image9.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 23, Balsubramanian in view of Su teaches A method for wireless communication at a base station (Balsubramanian), comprising:
generating, at a network coding layer of a protocol stack, a plurality of source packets that represent a data set; (Balsubramanian para. [0085] teaches that “The members of the group may receive a common command & control (C2) message that may be provided by a UAV traffic management (UTM) controller, or pilot, and may be transmitted via multicast by an eNB 210. The eNB 210 may communicate with one or more of the first UAV 202, the second UAV 204, the third UAV 206, and the fourth UAV 208 over a Uu interface. The eNB 210 may configure a group radio network temporary identifier (G-RNTI) for the group of UAVs in order to transmit a common group-specific C2.” )
encoding the plurality of source packets at the network coding layer using network coding, wherein the encoding generates a plurality of encoded packets from the plurality of source packets; (Balsubramanian teaches in paras. [0145]- [0146] teaches that the packets are “network coded” by teaching that “In order to signal a network coded packet, the MAC header may indicate the sequence number (e.g., media access control protocol data unit (MPDU) sequence numbers) of the packets that have been used to form the network coded packet.”)
and
transmitting the plurality of encoded packets in a broadcast. (Balsubramanian teaches in Fig. 2 a base station (eNB 210) communicates with four UAVs (UEs) over a Uu interface as a group wherein the UAVs are deployed to accomplish a common mission as a group. Paras. [0091] –[0093] teach sidelink assisted downlink broadcast (SADB) for transmission of packets to the group, in which packets lost by one member of the group may be available from another group member.)
Although Balsubramanian teaches a “common mission” represented by a C2 for which a set of four data packets are deployed to UAVs, Balsubramanian does NOT explicitly teach a “data set” per se.
In the analogous art of 3GPP 5G wireless communications, Su teaches a plurality of source packets representing a data set. (Su para. [0176]-[0178] teaches a “code block group” wherein code blocks in a transport block representing eMBB service data are combined. As shown in Fig. 13, sidelink communications enables the group of CBGs to reach the target user equipment (TUE):
PNG
media_image2.png
885
1105
media_image2.png
Greyscale
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to have combined Balsubramanian with Su to teach a “data set” prior to the effective date of the invention. Each of Balsubramanian and Su are in the field of wireless communications and teach sidelink communications. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to combine Balsubramanian with Su to improve resource usage and efficiency among cooperating groups of user equipment as taught by Su in paras. [0013] to [0018].
Regarding claim 24, Balsubramanian teaches The method of claim 23, wherein the network coding layer is a bottom sublayer of a packet data convergence protocol layer. (Balsubramanian para. [0093] teaches “The SADB protocol may be built ... on lower layers such as the packet data convergence protocol (PDCP), the radio link control (RLC), and the media access control/physical (MAC/PHY) layer. The PDCP implementation for SADB may be similar to application level implementation.)
Although Balsubramanian teaches an SADB, Balsubramanian does not identify the SADB as a network coding layer.
However, in the same field of endeavor, Le Bars teaches “the network coding layer is a bottom sublayer of a packet data convergence protocol layer”. (Le Bars teaches in para. [0045] adding a PDCP sublayer, a Network Coding Layer as shown in Figs. 5a and 5b as follows in element 503 which is between the PDCP header and RLC layer:
PNG
media_image10.png
661
1002
media_image10.png
Greyscale
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective date of the invention to combine Le Bars with Balsubramanian to teach a network coding layer. Each of Le Bars and Balsubramanian are in the field of wireless communications and in network decoding. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to combine Le Bars with Balsubramanian in order to enable improved robustness to data loss with a low impact on the latency as taught in Le Bars para. [0016].
Regarding claim 25, Balsubramanian teaches The method of claim 23, wherein the network coding layer is a top sublayer of a radio link control layer.(para. [0093] teaches “ The SADB protocol may be built at the application layer over user datagram protocol/internet protocol (UDP/IP) and may be independent of lower layers. The SADB protocol may also be built on lower layers such as the packet data convergence protocol (PDCP), the radio link control (RLC), and the media access control/physical (MAC/PHY) layer. The RLC implementation of SADB may require the RLC layer to transmit in acknowledged mode, which may incur overhead, as packets may need to be re-transmitted even if only one of the group members loses a packet.)
Although Balsubramanian teaches an SADB, Balsubramanian does not identify the SADB as a network coding layer.
However, in the same field of endeavor, Le Bars teaches “the network coding layer is a top sublayer of a radio link control layer”. (Le Bars teaches in para. [0045] adding a PDCP sublayer which Examiner interprets as below the PDCP and a “top sublayer of a radio link control layer”, a Network Coding Layer as shown in Figs. 5a and 5b as follows in element 503 which is between the PDCP header and RLC layer:
PNG
media_image10.png
661
1002
media_image10.png
Greyscale
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective date of the invention to combine Le Bars with Balsubramanian to teach a network coding layer. Each of Le Bars and Balsubramanian are in the field of wireless communications and in network decoding. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to combine Le Bars with Balsubramanian in order to enable improved robustness to data loss with a low impact on the latency as taught in Le Bars para. [0016].
Regarding claim 26, Balsubramanian in view of Le Bars teaches The method of claim 23, wherein the network coding layer is a layer below the packet data convergence protocol layer and above a radio link control layer. (Balsubramanian para. [0093] teaches The SADB protocol may be built at the application layer over user datagram protocol/internet protocol (UDP/IP) and may be independent of lower layers. The SADB protocol may also be built on lower layers such as the packet data convergence protocol (PDCP), the radio link control (RLC), and the media access control/physical (MAC/PHY) layer. The PDCP implementation for SADB may be similar to application level implementation. The RLC implementation of SADB may require the RLC layer to transmit in acknowledged mode, which may incur overhead, as packets may need to be re-transmitted even if only one of the group members loses a packet.)
Although Balsubramanian teaches an SADB, Balsubramanian does not identify the SADB as a network coding layer.
However, in the same field of endeavor, Le Bars teaches “a network coding layer is a layer below the packet data convergence protocol layer and above a radio link control layer”. (Le Bars teaches in para. [0045] adding a PDCP sublayer which Examiner interprets as below the PDCP, a Network Coding Layer as shown in Figs. 5a and 5b as follows in element 503 which is between the PDCP header and RLC layer:
PNG
media_image10.png
661
1002
media_image10.png
Greyscale
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective date of the invention to combine Le Bars with Balsubramanian to teach a network coding layer. Each of Le Bars and Balsubramanian are in the field of wireless communications and in network decoding. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to combine Le Bars with Balsubramanian in order to enable improved robustness to data loss with a low impact on the latency as taught in Le Bars para. [0016].
Regarding claim 27, Balsubramanian teaches The method of claim 23, further comprising:
allocating a first set of slots in a frame for the transmission of the plurality of encoded packets; (para. [0095] teaches a pre-specified ordering of users that ever user has to follow to access the channel at particular time slot for broadcasting loss/received information.
and
allocating a second set of slots in the frame for a re-transmission, by a user equipment (UE) over a sidelink channel, of one or more encoded packets of the plurality of encoded packets of the data set. (para. [0113] and Fig. 3 teaches “feedback” location in a frame which identify the packets that are lost:
PNG
media_image11.png
300
681
media_image11.png
Greyscale
.
Regarding claim 28, Balsubramanian in view of Su teaches An apparatus for wireless communication at a user equipment (UE),comprising:
one or more processors; (Balsubramanian para. [0164] teaches a processor may be used with software to implement a transceiver for use with a UE)
one or more memories coupled with the one or more processors; (Balsubramanian para. [0164] teaches a memory ROM, RAM cache memory and the like may be used to implement methods for a UE)
and
instructions stored in the one or more memories and executable by the one or more processors (Balsubramanian para. [0164] teaches a computer program implementing software ) to cause the apparatus to:
receive, as a broadcast from a base station, a plurality of encoded packets associated with a plurality of source packets representing a data set; (Balsubramanian teaches in Fig. 2 a base station (eNB 210) communicates with four UAVs over a Uu interface as a group wherein the UAVs are deployed to accomplish a common mission as a group. Paras. [0091] –[0093] teach sidelink assisted downlink broadcast (SADB) for transmission of packets to the group, in which packets lost by one member of the group may be available from another group member. Paras. [0145]- [0146] teach transmitting sets of packets encoded at a network using MPDU sequence numbers wherein “each group member may be assigned to transfer a specific set of packets in each iteration.” Examiner maps the sets of packets for a common mission as a “plurality of source packets representing a data set”).
attempt to recover the plurality of source packets from the plurality of encoded packets received from the base station; (Balsubramanian teaches Fig. 4 and para. [0136] teaches in step 402 determining packet loss for Uu interface as part of a gNACK determination process between a UAV and a base station. Para. [0137] teaches that the group may know the packet loss of all other members of the encoded packets)
and
transmit, to a second UE over a sidelink channel and based at least in part on failure by the UE to recover the plurality of source packets representing the data set, a message requesting sidelink assistance in recovering the plurality of source packets representing the data set. . (Balsubramanian para. [0090] teaches that group members may obtain lost packets directly from another member using sidelink channels implemented using, e.g. V2V. Balsubramanian para. [0091] teaches that SADB enables a groupcast NACK for packet loss dissemination among group members to enable packet repair among members. Examiner interprets the gNACK as a message requesting sidelink assistance in recovering the plurality of source packets representing the data set as shown in Fig. 2:
PNG
media_image1.png
703
530
media_image1.png
Greyscale
As shown a set of 4 packets are interpreted as the source data needed by the group of UAVs that receive broadcast packets and the gNACK enables recovery of the “lost packets”.)
Although Balsubramanian teaches a “common mission” for which a set of four data packets are deployed to UAVs, Balsubramanian does NOT explicitly teach a “data set” per se.
In the analogous art of 3GPP 5G wireless communications, Su teaches a plurality of source packets representing a data set. (Su para. [0176]-[0178] teaches a “code block group” wherein code blocks in a transport block representing eMBB service data are combined. As shown in Fig. 13, sidelink communications enables the group of CBGs to reach the target user equipment (TUE):
PNG
media_image2.png
885
1105
media_image2.png
Greyscale
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to have combined Balsubramanian with Su to teach a “data set” prior to the effective date of the invention. Each of Balsubramanian and Su are in the field of wireless communications and teach sidelink communications. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to combine Balsubramanian with Su to improve resource usage and efficiency among cooperating groups of user equipment as taught by Su in paras. [0013] to [0018].
Balsubramanian does NOT teach decode one or more of the plurality of encoded packets at a network coding layer that is between a packet data convergence protocol layer and a radio link control layer in a protocol stack. (Although Balsubramanian teaches in para. [0114] that the decoding of the recovered packets is through the network coding using eNB may choose to form more than one group. In this situation, two or more G-RNTIs may be allocated for each group and its dependent members. Balsubramanian does NOT specifically identify a network coding layer)
However, in the analogous art of 3GPP 5G wireless communications, Le Bars teaches decode one or more of the plurality of encoded packets at a network coding layer that is between a packet data convergence protocol layer and a radio link control layer in a protocol stack; (Le Bars teaches in para. [0204] implementing a Network Coding scheme at a PDCP sublayer, such that “encoded packets may thus be distributed over several transmission paths associated with several RLC layers/modules in order to increase spatial and frequency diversity.” Further, Le Bars teaches decoding at the network coding layer in Fig. 7b at block 705 “Network Decoding (Data Only)”.
PNG
media_image3.png
969
614
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Examiner notes that applicant’s para. [0091] includes a PDCP sublayer as an Option 2 for the network coding layer. Block 705 is expanded and illustrated as between an upper and a lower layer in Fig. 8:
PNG
media_image4.png
723
1220
media_image4.png
Greyscale
Balsubramanian further does NOT teach that an attempt to recover is “based at least in part on a failure to decode a threshold quantity of the plurality of encoded packets at the network coding layer”.
However, Le Bars teaches an attempt to recover is “based at least in part on a failure to decode a threshold quantity of the plurality of encoded packets at the network coding layer”. (Le Bars teaches in para. [0273] with respect to Fig. 8 of the network coding sublayer, that “it may occur that only one out of four sent PDU is received. In such case, the original SDU has been lost, and a retransmission of the PDU associated with the originally sent SDU may be requested.” Therefore, an attempt to recover is based on a failure to decode at the network coding sublayer.)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective date of the invention to combine Le Bars with Balsubramanian to teach a network coding layer. Each of Le Bars and Balsubramanian are in the field of wireless communications and in network decoding. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to combine Le Bars with Balsubramanian in order to enable improved robustness to data loss with a low impact on the latency as taught in Le Bars para. [0016].
Regarding claim 29, Balsubramanian teaches The apparatus of claim 28, wherein the instructions are further executable by the one or more processors to cause the apparatus to:
determine that the UE has failed to recover one or more encoded packets of the plurality of encoded packets; (Balsubramanian teaches in para. [0098] packet status information in Table 1 therefore, a UAV would determine packet status by reporting a pre-specified packet order according to packet sequence number and maintains their own packet status information after each user transmits.)
and
include, in the message, a request for the one or more encoded packets. (Balsubramanian Para. [0100] and table 2 that each UAV in a gNACK transmits status information so that the other UAVs know which packets of the set of packets are lost, the gNACK message is equivalent to a request for one or more encoded packets. Fig. 6 illustrates the request procedure:
PNG
media_image5.png
696
1078
media_image5.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 30, Balsubramanian teaches The apparatus of claim 28, wherein the instructions are further executable by the one or more processors to cause the apparatus to:
include, in the message, an index of the data set and one or more indices corresponding to the one or more encoded packets. (Balsubramanian teaches in para. [0097] and table 1 the packet status information for 6 packets by downlink broadcast for three users. Para. [0084] teaches that unicast may be used to re-transmit lost packets to members of a broadcast/multicast group and teaches that optimal transmission schemes for packet losses may use “index-coding”.
PNG
media_image6.png
222
591
media_image6.png
Greyscale
Claim 11 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Balsubramanian in view of Su further in view of Le Bars and further in view of US Pat. Pub. 2023016389 to Huiying Zhu et al. (herein after Zhu).
Regarding claim 11, Balsubramanian does NOT teach The method of claim 1, further comprising:
determining a channel quality, a reference signal received power, or a combination thereof, for one or more UEs;
and selecting a subset of UEs from the one or more UEs to which the message is to be transmitted based at least in part on the channel quality, the reference signal received power, or the combination thereof.
However, in the analogous art of 3GPP 5G wireless communications, Zhu teaches determining a channel quality, a reference signal received power, or a combination thereof, for one or more UEs; (Zhu para. [0218]- and Fig. 6 teach determining a channel quality by a communication device of another communication device. The first communication device checks channel quality by receiving second data from a second communication device:
PNG
media_image12.png
476
804
media_image12.png
Greyscale
selecting a subset of UEs from the one or more UEs to which the message is to be transmitted based at least in part on the channel quality, the reference signal received power, or the combination thereof. (Zhu teaches that in para. [0225] that “When the channel quality meets a seventh condition, the second communication device sends, to the first communication device through network coding, the first data including network-coded data.” Therefore, only when a channel quality condition is met does the second communication device send data to the first communication device. Examiner interprets the condition requirement as equivalent to “selecting” because if the channel quality is not met, the sending does not occur. Further, the data being sent is network coded CBG data sets as shown in Fig. 7:
PNG
media_image13.png
835
1076
media_image13.png
Greyscale
)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to have combined Balsubramanian with Zhu to teach a sending data based on a channel quality of network coded prior to the effective date of the invention. Each of Balsubramanian and Zhu are in the field of wireless communications and teach sidelink communications. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to combine Balsubramanian with Zhu because “when the channel quality is good, network coding-based transmission can be used to reduce excessive resource occupation in a HARQ retransmission process. This increases spectral efficiency in a data transmission process” as taught in para. [0228] of Zhu.
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any 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 MARGARET MARIE ANDERSON whose telephone number is (703)756-1068. The examiner can normally be reached 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, CHARLES JIANG can be reached at 571-270-7191. 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.
/MARGARET MARIE ANDERSON/Examiner, Art Unit 2412
/CHARLES C JIANG/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2412
Prosecution Insights