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 .
This action is response to the application filed on 10/10/2023. Claims 1-20 are pending and herein considered.
Oath/Declaration
The receipt of oath/declaration is acknowledged.
Drawings
The drawings were received on 10/10/2023. These drawings are reviewed and accepted by the Examiner.
Specification
The lengthy specification has not been checked to the extent necessary to determine the presence of all possible minor errors. Applicant’s cooperation is requested in correcting any errors of which applicant may become aware in the specification.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS), submitted on 05/13/24, is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CRR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement 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 of this title, 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 set forth in Graham v. John Deere Co., 383 U.S. 1, 148 USPQ 459 (1966), that are applied 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.
Claims 1-6, 9-13, 16-19 and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Xin et al. (U.S 2023/0117842) in view of Asterjadhi et al. (U.S 2019/0261402).
For claim 1:
Xin discloses a wireless communication method comprising: generating at least one frame (see Xin, at least figures 1-2; a Medium Access Control (MAC) frame header), wherein said at least one frame is configured to include a first medium access control (MAC) header field and a second MAC header field (see Xin, at least figures 1; a MAC header fields (e.g; QoS control field and high throughput control field), and
a queue size (QS) (see Xin, at least paragraph [0035]; a queue size) is encoded in the first MAC header field and the second MAC header field; and sending said at least one frame to an access point (AP).
Xin discloses a Queue Size (see Xin, at least paragraph [0035]; [0054]; [0107]; [0109]), but does not explicitly disclose a QS encoded in the first MAC header field and the second MAC header field; and sending said at least one frame to an access point (AP).
Asterjadhi, from the same or similar fields of endeavor, further discloses what Xie fails: a Scaling Factor subfield 320 may indicate the unit (e.g., in terms of number of octets) indicated by the Queue Size High subfield 325 and the Queue Size All subfield 330. As shown in Table 3.3, an example of such an encoding may be a scaling factor of 16 octets for the Scaling Factor subfield 320 and [0071] the Scaling Factor subfield 320 may be repurposed as an extension of the Queue Size High subfield 325 or the Queue Size All subfield 330 (e.g., the Queue Size High subfield 325 or the Queue Size All subfield 330 may convey 10 Mbytes instead of 8 Mbytes) (see Asterjadhi, at least paragraph [0070]-[0071]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious statement before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have a system comprises a method as taught by Asterjadhi. The motivation for doing this is to provide a system networks in order to improve traffic identifier (TID) based buffer status reporting.
For claims 2 and 17:
In addition to rejection in claims 2 and 17, Xin-Asterjadhi further disclose wherein said at least one frame comprises only a single frame, and the first MAC header field and the second MAC header field are both included in a same MAC header of the single frame (see Xin, at least figures 1; single frame, a MAC header fields (QoS control field and HT control field both in the same MAC header).
For claims 3 and 18:
In addition to rejection in claims 3 and 18, Xin-Asterjadhi further disclose wherein the first MAC header field is a quality of service (QoS) control field, and the second MAC header field is a high-throughput (HT) control field (see Xin, at least Figure 1, and paragraph [0034]; a quality of service (QoS) control field and HT control field).
For claim 4:
In addition to rejection in claim 4, Xin-Asterjadhi further disclose wherein the QS is encoded in a QS subfield of the QoS control field and an aggregate-control (A-control) subfield of the HT control field (see Xin, at least Figure 3, and paragraph [0014]; a Buffer Status Report (BSR) control subfield as carried by an A Control subfield of the High Efficiency (HE) variant High Throughput (HT) control field).
For claim 5:
In addition to rejection in claim 5, Xin-Asterjadhi further disclose wherein the A-control subfield is a buffer status report (BSR) A-control subfield (see Xin, at least Figure 3, and paragraph [0014]; a Buffer Status Report (BSR) control subfield as carried by an A Control subfield of the High Efficiency (HE) variant High Throughput (HT) control field).
For claim 6:
In addition to rejection in claim 6, Xin-Asterjadhi further disclose wherein the A-control subfield acts as an extension of the QS subfield (see Asterjadhi, at least paragraph [0071]; the Scaling Factor subfield 320 may be repurposed as an extension of the Queue Size High subfield 325 or the Queue Size All subfield 330).
Therefore, it would have been obvious statement before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have a system comprises a method as taught by Asterjadhi. The motivation for doing this is to provide a system networks in order to improve traffic identifier (TID) based buffer status reporting.
For claims 9 and 19:
In addition to rejection in claims 9 and 19, Xin-Asterjadhi further disclose wherein said at least one frame comprises a first frame and a second frame in an aggregate MAC protocol data unit (A-MPDU), the first MAC header field is included in a MAC header of the first frame, and the second MAC header field is included in a MAC header of the second frame (see Xin, at least paragraph [0033]; the non-AP STA can aggregate one or more QoS data frames or QoS Null frames carrying QoS control fields in an Aggregate MAC Protocol Data Unit (A-MPDU) to report the buffer status for different TIDs).
For claim 10:
In addition to rejection in claim 10, Xin-Asterjadhi further disclose wherein the second frame is a quality of service (QoS) null frame (see Xin, at least paragraph [0033]; the non-AP STA can aggregate one or more QoS data frames or QoS Null frames carrying QoS control fields in an Aggregate MAC Protocol Data Unit (A-MPDU) to report the buffer status for different TIDs).
For claim 11:
In addition to rejection in claim 11, Xin-Asterjadhi further disclose wherein the first MAC header field is a first quality of service (QoS) control field, and the second MAC header field is a second QoS control field (see Xin, at least paragraph [0079]; the receiver can report the earliest MSDU expiration time of the buffer using QoS BSR Control subfield as shown in FIG. 12 or QoS Control field for QoS BSR in the HT control field as shown in FIG. 13).
For claim 12:
In addition to rejection in claim 12, Xin-Asterjadhi further disclose wherein the QS is encoded in a first QS subfield of the first QoS control field and a second QS subfield of the second QoS control field, where subfield encoding of the second QS subfield is different from subfield encoding of the first QS subfield (see Asterjadhi, at least table 3.3, 4.1, paragraphs [0070]-[0075]; an A-MPDU contains multiple QoS Control fields, bit 4 shall not be identical across all MPDUs that contain the QoS Control Fields and bits 8-15 of these QoS Control fields shall be identical across all MPDUs with equal value of the delta TID subfield 310). The motivation for doing this is to provide a system networks in order to improve traffic identifier (TID) based buffer status reporting.
For claim 13:
In addition to rejection in claim 13, Xin-Asterjadhi further disclose wherein the second QS subfield acts as an extension of the first QS subfield (see Asterjadhi, at least [0071]; In some examples, the Scaling Factor subfield 320 may be repurposed as an extension of the Queue Size High subfield 325 or the Queue Size All subfield 330 (e.g., the Queue Size High subfield 325 or the Queue Size All subfield 330 may convey 10 Mbytes instead of 8 Mbytes).
For claim 16:
For claim 16, claim 16 is directed to a wireless communication method which has similar scope as claim 1. Therefore, claim 16 remains un-patentable for the same reasons.
For claim 20:
For claim 20, claim 20 is directed to a wireless communication device which has similar scope as claim 1. Therefore, claim 20 remains un-patentable for the same reasons.
Claims 7-8, 14 and 15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Xin et al. (U.S 2023/0117842) in view of Asterjadhi et al. (U.S 2019/0261402) further in view of Verma et al. (U.S 2024/0107369; hereinafter “Verma” cited with provisional 63/409,651).
For citation purposes, hereinafter, the Office Action refers to the cited by Verma et al. with provisional 63/409,651, which qualifies as prior art date.
For claim 7:
In addition to rejection in claim 7, Xin-Asterjadhi does not explicitly disclose wherein the A-control subfield comprises an unscaled value.
Verma, from the same or similar fields of endeavor, further discloses what Xie fails: an A-control field of a communication to the wireless access point (e.g., as discussed in further detail hereinafter in connection with FIG. 11) and the L-G BSR may be represented in a data structure that includes a scaling factor (SF), and unscaled values for: a buffer size for the voice access category (QS AC_ VO) (see Verma, at least figure 11 and paragraph [0070]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious statement before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have a system comprises a method as taught by Verma. The motivation for doing this is to provide a system networks in order to improving reliability for wireless communication between devices.
For claim 8:
In addition to rejection in claim 7, Xin-Asterjadhi-Verma further disclose wherein the A-control subfield further comprises a scaling factor (see Verma, at least paragraph [0071]-[0072]; the respective buffer sizes and latency tolerances can be obtained by combining (e.g., multiplying) these respective unscaled values with a value that is based on the scaling factor).
For claim 14:
In addition to rejection in claim 14, Xin-Asterjadhi does not explicitly disclose wherein the second QS subfield comprises an unscaled value.
Verma, from the same or similar fields of endeavor, further discloses what Xie fails: an A-control field of a communication to the wireless access point (e.g., as discussed in further detail hereinafter in connection with FIG. 11) and the L-G BSR may be represented in a data structure that includes a scaling factor (SF), and unscaled values for: a buffer size for the voice access category (QS AC_ VO) (see Verma, at least figure 11 and paragraph [0070]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious statement before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have a system comprises a method as taught by Verma. The motivation for doing this is to provide a system networks in order to improving reliability for wireless communication between devices.
For claim 15:
In addition to rejection in claim 15, Xin-Asterjadhi-Verma further disclose wherein the second QS subfield further comprises a scaling factor (see Asterjadhi, at least paragraph [0070]; Scaling Factor subfield 320 may indicate the unit ( e.g., in terms of number of octets) indicated by the Queue Size High subfield 325 and the Queue Size All subfield 330. As shown in Table 3.3, an example of such an encoding may be a scaling factor of 16 octets for the Scaling Factor subfield 320 value of 0, 256 octets for a value of 1, 2048 octets for a value of 2, and 32768 octets for a value of 3 and [0071]; the Scaling Factor subfield 320 may be repurposed as an extension of the Queue Size High subfield 325 or the Queue Size All subfield 330 (e.g., the Queue Size High subfield 325 or the Queue Size All subfield 330 may convey 10 Mbytes instead of 8 Mbytes). As such, MPDUs may be generated to convey TID-specific BSRs with 20 Mbytes (e.g., with QoS buffer size field, queue size high field, queue size all field, and the Scaling Factor subfield 320). The motivation for doing this is to provide a system networks in order to improving reliability for wireless communication between devices.
Conclusion
The prior arts made or record and not relied upon are considered pertinent to applicant's disclosures. Agiwal et al. (U.S 2011/0268031), discloses a method of encoding control information in a MAC PDU, according to an embodiment of the present invention. A transmitting device generates the MAC PDU. In step 102, a first set of control information is encoded in a MAC header field of a MAC PDU. In step 104, a second set of control information is encoded in an EH group field following the MAC header field.
Gignard et al. (WO-2022013437-A1), discloses a MAC data frame comprises a MAC header 210, a frame body 220 and a FCS field 230. The MAC header 210 includes, amongst other fields, a Frame Control header 211, a QoS control field 212 and a HT control field 213. The QoS control field 212 may be used by non-HE non-AP station (i.e. not 802.11 ax) to report buffer status.
Agiwal et al. (U.S 2011/0007753), discloses a method encoding the first part in a first header of the MAC PDU, encoding the second part in a second header of the MAC PDU.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to LAN HUONG TRUONG whose telephone number is (571)270-5829. The examiner can normally be reached on Mon-Fri (7:30AM-5:00PM).
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, RICKY NGO can be reached on 571-272-3139. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov/. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/Lan-Huong Truong/
Primary Examiner, Art Unit: 2464
02/07/2026