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 .
Claim Status
This office action is in response to the communication(s) filed on 12/27/2023.
Claim(s) 1-20 is/are currently presenting for examination.
Claim(s) 1, 9, and 17 is/are independent claim(s).
Claim(s) 1-6, 8-14, and 16-19 is/are rejected.
Claim(s) 7, 15, and 20 is/are objected to.
This action has been made NON-FINAL.
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 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.
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.
Claim(s) 1-6, 8-14, and 16-19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US_20250267656_A1_Yang in view of US_20090181663_A1_Hu and US_20230047951_A1_Lo.
Regarding claim 1, Yang discloses a device, comprising: a wireless communications interface; and one or more processors to: allocate at least a first data burst and a second data burst to a data buffer (Yang figure 5, element 510-520, and paragraph 5, the “…a user equipment (UE) includes receiving a first data burst and a second data burst…”); assign, to the first data burst, a timer corresponding to an amount of time for output of the first data burst until one or more timing criteria expire buffer (Yang paragraph 7, “…the information associated with transmission priorities includes at least one of a remaining time until a respective delivery deadline for each of the first data burst and the second data burst…”, Yang paragraph 90, “…When the PDB or PSDB of a data burst has expired (i.e., when the delivery deadline of the data burst has passed) without completing the transmission of the data burst, the UE may discard any remaining packets of the data burst…”, also read paragraphs 68, 77, 87); responsive to the first data burst and the second data burst each representing periodic network traffic (Yang paragraph 66, “…each stream consisting of periodic bursts of data with different periodicities and different delay requirements. …”); and cause the wireless communications interface to transmit the first data burst (Yang figure 5, element 560, paragraph 5, the different data bursts including the first and second data bursts), and to transmit the second data burst a (Yang figure 5, element 560, paragraph 5, the different data bursts including the first and second data bursts), but does not disclose …”); assign, to the second data burst, an index indicative of the position of the second data burst in the data buffer relative to the first data burst; transmit the first data burst and the timer for the first data burst, and transmit the second data burst and the index for the second data burst.
Hu discloses assign, to the second data burst, an index indicative of the position of the second data burst in the data buffer relative to the first data burst (Hu paragraph 62, “… the control message may indicate a position of the data burst relevant to a marker within the continuous stream of data, rather than to a position in the circular transceiver buffers. For example, the marker may be a periodic synchronization pulse and the control message may indicate a displacement from a sync pulse”); transmit the second data burst and the index for the second data burst (Hu abstract, “… A data burst is stored in the circular buffer at a selected location and a control message is transmitted with an indication of the selected location of the data burst in the circular buffer. The data burst is transmitted as part of the continuous stream of data from the circular buffer”), but does not disclose transmit the first data burst and the timer for the first data burst
Lo discloses transmit the first data burst and the timer for the first data burst (Lo paragraph 97, “…The first transmit bursts include a training header and a training frame including a timing field…”)
Thus it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to implement the teachings of Hu’s a data burst is stored in the circular buffer at a selected location and a control message is transmitted with an indication of the selected location of the data burst in the circular buffer, and Lo’s the first transmit bursts include a training header and a training frame including a timing field in Yang’s system to let the receiver process the data bursts properly. This method for improving the system of Yang was within the ordinary ability of one of ordinary skill in the art based on the teachings of Hu and Lo. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to combine the teachings of Yang, Hu, and Lo to obtain the invention as specified in claim 1.
Regarding claim 2, Yang, Hu, and Lo disclose the device of claim 1, ad Lo further discloses wherein the one or more processors are to assign the timer in a header associated with the first data burst (Lo paragraph 97, “…The first transmit bursts include a training header and a training frame including a timing field…”).
Regarding claim 3, Yang, Hu, and Lo disclose the device of claim 1, and Yang further discloses wherein the one or more processors are to not assign the timer to the second data burst responsive to the first data burst and the second data burst each representing periodic network traffic (Yang paragraphs 66, 68, 77, 81, 89).
Regarding claim 4, Yang, Hu, and Lo disclose the device of claim 1, and Yang further discloses wherein the first data burst and the second data burst each comprise one or more of protocol data unit (PDU) sets (Yang paragraph 7, “…an indication of or a lack of the indication of end Protocol Data Unit (PDU) of a PDU set associated with a respective one of the first data burst and the second data burst, …”).
Regarding claim 5, Yang, Hu, and Lo disclose the device of claim 4, and Yang further discloses wherein the one or more processors are to: generate the one or more PDU sets of the first data burst and the second data burst using a same application (Yang paragraphs 66-67); and assign, to the one or more PDU sets of the first data burst and the second data burst, a same value of a PDU set importance score (Yang paragraph 7, “…and a PDU set importance associated with a respective one of the first data burst and the second data burst”, page 13 claim 2, “…a PDU set importance associated with a respective one of the first data burst and the second data burst.”).
Regarding claim 6, Yang, Hu, and Lo disclose the device of claim 1, and Yang further discloses wherein the first data burst and the second data burst are each representative of at least one of image data, audio data, or video data (Yang paragraph 66, “…the UL data traffic usually consists of an audio stream, a sensing or pose data stream, and for augmented reality (AR), a video stream, each stream consisting of periodic bursts of data with different periodicities and different delay requirements…”).
Regarding claim 8, Yang, Hu, and Lo disclose the device of claim 1, and Yang further discloses wherein the one or more timing criteria comprise at least one of a PDU set delay budget (PSDB) or a PDU set discard time (PSDT) (Yang paragraph 90, “…When the PDB or PSDB of a data burst has expired (i.e., when the delivery deadline of the data burst has passed) without completing the transmission of the data burst, the UE may discard any remaining packets of the data burst…”).
Regarding claim 9, Yang, Hu, and Lo disclose the limitations as set forth in claim 1.
Regarding claim 10, Yang, Hu, and Lo disclose the limitations as set forth in claim 2.
Regarding claim 11, Yang, Hu, and Lo disclose the limitations as set forth in claim 3.
Regarding claim 12, Yang, Hu, and Lo disclose the limitations as set forth in claim 4.
Regarding claim 13, Yang, Hu, and Lo disclose the limitations as set forth in claim 5.
Regarding claim 14, Yang, Hu, and Lo disclose the limitations as set forth in claim 6.
Regarding claim 16, Yang, Hu, and Lo disclose the limitations as set forth in claim 8.
Regarding claim 17, Yang, Hu, and Lo disclose the limitations as set forth in claim 1.
Regarding claim 18, Yang, Hu, and Lo disclose the limitations as set forth in claim 5.
Regarding claim 19, Yang, Hu, and Lo disclose the limitations as set forth in claim 6.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 7, 15, and 20 is/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
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to WEIBIN HUANG whose telephone number is (571)270-3695. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 9:30AM - 6:00PM.
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, Sujoy Kundu can be reached at (571)272-8586. 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.
/W.H/Examiner, Art Unit 2471
/SUJOY K KUNDU/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2471