DETAILED ACTION
This office action is a response to the application filed 25 January 2024, as a continuation of PCT/CN2022/090977 filed 5 May 2022, claiming foreign priority of CN 202110846541.6 filed 26 July 2021, wherein claims 31-60 are pending and ready for examination.
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 .
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statements (IDS) submitted on 12 December 2024, 24 March 2025, and 29 April 2025 are in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statements are being considered by the examiner.
Priority
Acknowledgment is made of applicant's claim for foreign priority based on an application filed as China 202110846541.6 on 26 July 2021. Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
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.
Claims 31-33, 37, 42-44, 50, 52-54, and 57-59 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over You et al. (US 2019/0190654 A1), hereafter referred You, in view of CN 101262275 A. A machine translation of CN 101262275 A is provided and hereafter referred Li.
Regarding claim 31, You teaches a device, comprising:
at least one processor (You, Fig. 14, [0183]; the device include processors); and
a non-transitory computer-readable storage medium storing a program to be executed by the at least one processor, the program including instructions (You, Fig. 14, [0185]; the processors control the overall operation of various modules and may be implemented by hardware, firmware, software, where the software may be included in the processors or stored in memories so as to be driven by the processors) to:
receive outer-code encoded data (You, Fig. 9, [0125]; information to which a plurality of channel codes are sequentially applied may be transmitted/received, where figure 9 illustrates information entering outer code encoding and the outer-code encoded data from the outer code encoding block being received by the inner code encoding block);
perform inner-code encoding on the outer-code encoded data to generate inner-code encoded data, and outputting the inner-code encoded data (You, Fig. 9, [0125]; information to which a plurality of channel codes are sequentially applied may be transmitted/received, where figure 9 illustrates the inner code encoding block perform inner code encoding on the outer code encoded data and output the result to the modulation block); and
perform outer-code decoding on the outer-code encoded data (You, Fig. 9, [0125]; information to which a plurality of channel codes are sequentially applied may be transmitted/received, where figure 9 illustrates the inner code decoding block performs inner-code decoding on its input which is outer-code encoded and inner-code encoded data, and outputs to the outer code decoding block data that would have been inner code decoded).
You does not expressly teach determine, based on a status of performing outer-code decoding on the outer-code encoded data, quality of a link for transmission of the outer-code encoded data.
However, Li teaches determine, based on a status of performing outer-code decoding on the outer-code encoded data, quality of a link for transmission of the outer-code encoded data (Li, Fig. 4-5, p. 5; the following process is carried out, the outer code decoding (S502 in Fig. 5) of the transmission data block code decoding to the outer code, the CRC calculation, and link quality feedback at the request of the terminal where the link quality feedback is compared to the link quality threshold).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the effective filing date of the invention to create the invention of You to include the above recited limitations as taught by Li in order to improve service performance (Li, p. 4).
Regarding claim 42, You teaches a device, comprising:
at least one processor (You, Fig. 14, [0183]; the device include processors); and
a non-transitory computer-readable storage medium storing a program to be executed by the at least one processor, the program including instructions (You, Fig. 14, [0185]; the processors control the overall operation of various modules and may be implemented by hardware, firmware, software, where the software may be included in the processors or stored in memories so as to be driven by the processors) to:
receive outer-code encoded and inner-code encoded data (You, Fig. 9, [0125]; information to which a plurality of channel codes are sequentially applied may be transmitted/received, where figure 9 illustrates the demodulation block outputting outer-code encoded and inner-coded encoded data into the inner code decoding block, hence the inner code decoding block is receiving outer-code encoded and inner-code encoded data);
perform inner-code decoding on the outer-code encoded and inner-code encoded data to generate inner-code decoded data, and outputting the inner-code decoded data (You, Fig. 9, [0125]; information to which a plurality of channel codes are sequentially applied may be transmitted/received, where figure 9 illustrates the inner code decoding block performs inner-code decoding on its input which is outer-code encoded and inner-code encoded data, and outputs to the outer code decoding block data that would have been inner code decoded); and
perform outer-code decoding on the inner-code decoded data (You, Fig. 9, [0125]; information to which a plurality of channel codes are sequentially applied may be transmitted/received, where figure 9 illustrates the outer code decoding block performs outer-code decoding on its input which is inner code decoded).
You does not expressly teach determine, based on a status of performing outer-code decoding on the inner-code decoded data, quality of a link for transmission of the outer-code encoded and inner-code encoded data.
However, Li teaches determine, based on a status of performing outer-code decoding on the inner-code decoded data, quality of a link for transmission of the outer-code encoded and inner-code encoded data (Li, Fig. 4-5, p. 5; the following process is carried out, the outer code decoding (S502 in Fig. 5) of the transmission data block code decoding to the outer code, the CRC calculation, and link quality feedback at the request of the terminal where the link quality feedback is compared to the link quality threshold).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the effective filing date of the invention to create the invention of You to include the above recited limitations as taught by Li in order to improve service performance (Li, p. 4).
Regarding claim 52, You teaches a method, comprising:
receiving outer-code encoded data (You, Fig. 9, [0125]; information to which a plurality of channel codes are sequentially applied may be transmitted/received, where figure 9 illustrates information entering outer code encoding and the outer-code encoded data from the outer code encoding block being received by the inner code encoding block);
performing inner-code encoding on the outer-code encoded data to generate inner-code encoded data, and outputting inner-code encoded data (You, Fig. 9, [0125]; information to which a plurality of channel codes are sequentially applied may be transmitted/received, where figure 9 illustrates the inner code encoding block perform inner code encoding on the outer code encoded data and output the result to the modulation block); and
performing outer-code decoding on the outer-code encoded data (You, Fig. 9, [0125]; information to which a plurality of channel codes are sequentially applied may be transmitted/received, where figure 9 illustrates the inner code decoding block performs inner-code decoding on its input which is outer-code encoded and inner-code encoded data, and outputs to the outer code decoding block data that would have been inner code decoded).
You does not expressly teach determining, based on a status of performing outer-code decoding on the outer-code encoded data, quality of a link for transmission of the outer-code encoded data.
However, Li teaches determining, based on a status of performing outer-code decoding on the outer-code encoded data, quality of a link for transmission of the outer-code encoded data (Li, Fig. 4-5, p. 5; the following process is carried out, the outer code decoding (S502 in Fig. 5) of the transmission data block code decoding to the outer code, the CRC calculation, and link quality feedback at the request of the terminal where the link quality feedback is compared to the link quality threshold).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the effective filing date of the invention to create the invention of You to include the above recited limitations as taught by Li in order to improve service performance (Li, p. 4).
Regarding claim 57, You teaches a method, wherein the method comprises:
receiving outer-code encoded and inner-code encoded data (You, Fig. 9, [0125]; information to which a plurality of channel codes are sequentially applied may be transmitted/received, where figure 9 illustrates the demodulation block outputting outer-code encoded and inner-coded encoded data into the inner code decoding block, hence the inner code decoding block is receiving outer-code encoded and inner-code encoded data);
performing inner-code decoding on the outer-code encoded and inner-code encoded data to generate inner-code decoded data, and outputting the inner-code decoded data (You, Fig. 9, [0125]; information to which a plurality of channel codes are sequentially applied may be transmitted/received, where figure 9 illustrates the inner code decoding block performs inner-code decoding on its input which is outer-code encoded and inner-code encoded data, and outputs to the outer code decoding block data that would have been inner code decoded); and
performing outer-code decoding on the inner-code decoded data (You, Fig. 9, [0125]; information to which a plurality of channel codes are sequentially applied may be transmitted/received, where figure 9 illustrates the outer code decoding block performs outer-code decoding on its input which is inner code decoded).
You does not expressly teach determining, based on a status of performing outer-code decoding on the inner-code decoded data, quality of a link for transmission of the outer-code encoded and inner-code encoded data.
However, Li teaches determining, based on a status of performing outer-code decoding on the inner-code decoded data, quality of a link for transmission of the outer-code encoded and inner-code encoded data (Li, Fig. 4-5, p. 5; the following process is carried out, the outer code decoding (S502 in Fig. 5) of the transmission data block code decoding to the outer code, the CRC calculation, and link quality feedback at the request of the terminal where the link quality feedback is compared to the link quality threshold).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the effective filing date of the invention to create the invention of You to include the above recited limitations as taught by Li in order to improve service performance (Li, p. 4).
Regarding claims 32 and 53, You in view of Li teaches the device according to claim 31and the method according to claim 52 above. You does not expressly teach wherein the program includes further instructions to:
determine a quantity of erroneous symbols in each of P1 codeword sequences of the outer-code encoded data based on a status of performing outer-code decoding on the P1 codeword sequences, wherein P1 is a positive integer; and
determine the quality of the link based on a quantity of erroneous symbols in the P1 codeword sequences.
However, Li teaches wherein the program includes further instructions to:
determine a quantity of erroneous symbols in each of P1 codeword sequences of the outer-code encoded data based on a status of performing outer-code decoding on the P1 codeword sequences, wherein P1 is a positive integer (Li, p. 3; transmits several redundancy check error according to outer code decoding block 4); and
determine the quality of the link based on a quantity of erroneous symbols in the P1 codeword sequences (Li, p. 3; in step S404 the checksum cyclic redundancy counting module counts the correct cyclic redundancy check in the inverse process directly, then in step S408 the RNC sends the counting process request information when feeding back link quality at the request terminal).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the effective filing date of the invention to create the invention of You to include the above recited limitations as taught by Li in order to improve service performance (Li, p. 4).
Regarding claims 33 and 54, You in view of Li teaches the device according to claim 31 and the method according to claim 52 above. You does not expressly teach wherein program includes further instructions to:
determine, based on a status of performing outer-code decoding on a codeword sequence of the outer-code encoded data, an indication parameter corresponding to the codeword sequence; and determine the quality of the link based on indication parameters corresponding to P2 codeword sequences of the outer-code encoded data, wherein P2 is a positive integer.
However, Li teaches wherein program includes further instructions to:
determine, based on a status of performing outer-code decoding on a codeword sequence of the outer-code encoded data, an indication parameter corresponding to the codeword sequence; and determine the quality of the link based on indication parameters corresponding to P2 codeword sequences of the outer-code encoded data, wherein P2 is a positive integer (Li, p. 3; in step S404 the checksum cyclic redundancy counting module counts the correct cyclic redundancy check in the inverse process directly, then in step S408 the RNC sends the counting process request information when feeding back link quality at the request terminal where the counting process request information carries the link quality threshold).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the effective filing date of the invention to create the invention of You to include the above recited limitations as taught by Li in order to improve service performance (Li, p. 4).
Regarding claims 37, You in view of Li teaches the device according to claim 31 above. Further, You teaches wherein the inner-code encoded data is data on which outer-code encoding is performed (You, Fig. 9, [0125]; information to which a plurality of channel codes are sequentially applied may be transmitted/received, where figure 9 illustrates the inner code decoding block performs inner-code decoding on its input which is outer-code encoded and inner-code encoded data, and outputs to the outer code decoding block data that would have been inner code decoded).
Regarding claims 43 and 58, You in view of Li teaches the device according to claim 42 and the method according to claim 57 above. You does not expressly teach wherein the program includes further instructions to:
determine a quantity of erroneous symbols in each of P3 codeword sequences of the inner-code decoded data based on a status of performing outer-code decoding on the P3 codeword sequences, wherein P3 is a positive integer; and
determine the quality of the link based on a quantity of erroneous symbols in the P3 codeword sequences.
However, Li teaches wherein the program includes further instructions to:
determine a quantity of erroneous symbols in each of P3 codeword sequences of the inner-code decoded data based on a status of performing outer-code decoding on the P3 codeword sequences, wherein P3 is a positive integer (Li, p. 3; transmits several redundancy check error according to outer code decoding block 4); and
determine the quality of the link based on a quantity of erroneous symbols in the P3 codeword sequences (Li, p. 3; in step S404 the checksum cyclic redundancy counting module counts the correct cyclic redundancy check in the inverse process directly, then in step S408 the RNC sends the counting process request information when feeding back link quality at the request terminal).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the effective filing date of the invention to create the invention of You to include the above recited limitations as taught by Li in order to improve service performance (Li, p. 4).
Regarding claims 44 and 59, You in view of Li teaches the device according to claim 42 and the method according to claim 57 above. You does not expressly teach wherein the program includes further instructions to:
determine, based on a status of performing outer-code decoding on a codeword sequence of the inner-code decoded data, an indication parameter corresponding to the codeword sequence; and determine the quality of the link based on indication parameters corresponding to P4 codeword sequences of the inner-code decoded data, wherein P4 is a positive integer.
However, Li teaches wherein the program includes further instructions to:
determine, based on a status of performing outer-code decoding on a codeword sequence of the inner-code decoded data, an indication parameter corresponding to the codeword sequence; and determine the quality of the link based on indication parameters corresponding to P4 codeword sequences of the inner-code decoded data, wherein P4 is a positive integer (Li, p. 3; in step S404 the checksum cyclic redundancy counting module counts the correct cyclic redundancy check in the inverse process directly, then in step S408 the RNC sends the counting process request information when feeding back link quality at the request terminal where the counting process request information carries the link quality threshold).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the effective filing date of the invention to create the invention of You to include the above recited limitations as taught by Li in order to improve service performance (Li, p. 4).
Regarding claim 50, You in view of Li teaches the device according to claim 42 above. Further, You teaches wherein the output data is data on which inner-code decoding is performed (You, Fig. 9, [0125]; information to which a plurality of channel codes are sequentially applied may be transmitted/received, where figure 9 illustrates the inner code decoding block performs inner-code decoding on its input which is outer-code encoded and inner-code encoded data, and outputs to the outer code decoding block data that would have been inner code decoded).
Claims 34, 35, 38-40, 45-47, 55, and 56 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over You in view of Li as applied to claims 31, 42, and 52 above, and further in view of Smith et al. (US 2019/0068322 A1), hereafter referred Smith.
Regarding claims 34 and 55, You in view of Li teaches the device according to claim 31 and the method according to claim 52 above. Further, You teaches wherein the instructions to perform outer-code decoding on the outer-code encoded data generates outer-code decoded data (You, Fig. 9, [0125]; information to which a plurality of channel codes are sequentially applied may be transmitted/received, where figure 9 illustrates the inner code decoding block performs inner-code decoding on its input which is outer-code encoded and inner-code encoded data, and outputs to the outer code decoding block data that would have been inner code decoded).
You in view of Li does not expressly teach wherein the outer-code decoded data is data on which outer-code encoding and de-skewing are performed.
However, Smith teaches wherein the outer-code decoded data is data on which outer-code encoding and de-skewing are performed (Smith, [0033]; incoming data received through multiple communication lanes and multiplexer are first aligned and de-skewed, then the staircase FEC is performed for hard-decision outer encoding of the incoming data).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the effective filing date of the invention to create the invention of You in view of Li to include the above recited limitations as taught by Smith in order to achieve both high data rate and low error rate (Smith, [0010]).
Regarding claims 35 and 56, You in view of Li teaches the device according to claim 31 and the method according to claim 52 above. Further, You teaches wherein the instructions to perform outer-code decoding on the outer-code encoded data generates outer-code decoded data (You, Fig. 9, [0125]; information to which a plurality of channel codes are sequentially applied may be transmitted/received, where figure 9 illustrates the inner code decoding block performs inner-code decoding on its input which is outer-code encoded and inner-code encoded data, and outputs to the outer code decoding block data that would have been inner code decoded).
You in view of Li does not expressly teach wherein the outer-code decoded data is data on which outer-code encoding, lane reordering, and first de-interleaving are performed.
However, Smith teaches wherein the outer-code decoded data is data on which outer-code encoding, lane reordering, and first de-interleaving are performed (Smith, Fig. 2; data is alignment locked, PCS lane descrewed, then PCS lane reorder and de-interleaved).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the effective filing date of the invention to create the invention of You in view of Li to include the above recited limitations as taught by Smith in order to achieve both high data rate and low error rate (Smith, [0010]).
Regarding claims 38, You in view of Li teaches the device according to claim 31 above. You in view of Li does not expressly teach wherein the inner-code encoded data is data on which outer-code encoding and de-skewing are performed.
However, Smith teaches wherein the inner-code encoded data is data on which outer-code encoding and de-skewing are performed (Smith, [0033]; incoming data received through multiple communication lanes and multiplexer are first aligned and de-skewed, then the staircase FEC is performed for hard-decision outer encoding of the incoming data).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the effective filing date of the invention to create the invention of You in view of Li to include the above recited limitations as taught by Smith in order to achieve both high data rate and low error rate (Smith, [0010]).
Regarding claims 39, You in view of Li teaches the device according to claim 31 above. You in view of Li does not expressly teach wherein the inner-code encoded data is data on which outer-code encoding, de-skewing, and lane reordering are performed.
However, Smith teaches wherein the inner-code encoded data is data on which outer-code encoding, de-skewing, and lane reordering are performed (Smith, Fig. 2, [0033]; incoming data received through multiple communication lanes and multiplexer are first aligned and de-skewed, then the staircase FEC is performed for hard-decision outer encoding of the incoming data, where the data is alignment locked, PCS lane descrewed, then PCS lane reorder and de-interleaved).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the effective filing date of the invention to create the invention of You in view of Li to include the above recited limitations as taught by Smith in order to achieve both high data rate and low error rate (Smith, [0010]).
Regarding claims 40, You in view of Li teaches the device according to claim 31 above. You in view of Li does not expressly teach wherein the inner-code encoded data is data on which outer-code encoding, de-skewing, lane reordering, and first de-interleaving are performed.
However, Smith teaches wherein the inner-code encoded data is data on which outer-code encoding, de-skewing, lane reordering, and first de-interleaving are performed (Smith, Fig. 2, [0033]; incoming data received through multiple communication lanes and multiplexer are first aligned and de-skewed, then the staircase FEC is performed for hard-decision outer encoding of the incoming data, where the data is alignment locked, PCS lane descrewed, then PCS lane reorder and de-interleaved).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the effective filing date of the invention to create the invention of You in view of Li to include the above recited limitations as taught by Smith in order to achieve both high data rate and low error rate (Smith, [0010]).
Regarding claim 45, You in view of Li teaches the device according to claim 42 above. You in view of Li does not expressly teach wherein the instructions to perform outer-code decoding on the inner-code decoded data generates outer-code decoded data, and wherein the outer-code decoded data is data on which inner-code decoding and de-skewing are performed.
However, Smith teaches wherein the instructions to perform outer-code decoding on the inner-code decoded data generates outer-code decoded data, and wherein the outer-code decoded data is data on which inner-code decoding and de-skewing are performed (Smith, [0033]; incoming data received through multiple communication lanes and multiplexer are first aligned and de-skewed, then the staircase FEC is performed for hard-decision outer encoding of the incoming data).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the effective filing date of the invention to create the invention of You in view of Li to include the above recited limitations as taught by Smith in order to achieve both high data rate and low error rate (Smith, [0010]).
Regarding claim 46, You in view of Li teaches the device according to claim 42 above. Further, You teaches wherein the instructions to perform outer-code decoding on the inner-code decoded data generates outer-code decoded data (You, Fig. 9, [0125]; information to which a plurality of channel codes are sequentially applied may be transmitted/received, where figure 9 illustrates the inner code decoding block performs inner-code decoding on its input which is outer-code encoded and inner-code encoded data, and outputs to the outer code decoding block data that would have been inner code decoded).
You in view of Li does not expressly teach wherein the outer-code decoded data is data on which inner-code decoding and first de-interleaving are performed.
However, Smith teaches wherein the outer-code decoded data is data on which inner-code decoding and first de-interleaving are performed (Smith, Fig. 2; data is de-interleaved and RS (544,514) Decode).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the effective filing date of the invention to create the invention of You in view of Li to include the above recited limitations as taught by Smith in order to achieve both high data rate and low error rate (Smith, [0010]).
Regarding claim 47, You in view of Li teaches the device according to claim 42 above. Further, You teaches wherein the instructions to perform outer-code decoding on the inner-code decoded data generates outer-code decoded data (You, Fig. 9, [0125]; information to which a plurality of channel codes are sequentially applied may be transmitted/received, where figure 9 illustrates the inner code decoding block performs inner-code decoding on its input which is outer-code encoded and inner-code encoded data, and outputs to the outer code decoding block data that would have been inner code decoded).
You in view of Li does not expressly teach wherein the outer-code decoded data is data on which inner-code decoding, lane reordering, and first de-interleaving are performed.
However, Smith teaches wherein the outer-code decoded data is data on which inner-code decoding, lane reordering, and first de-interleaving are performed (Smith, Fig. 2; data is alignment locked, PCS lane descrewed, then PCS lane reorder and de-interleaved).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the effective filing date of the invention to create the invention of You in view of Li to include the above recited limitations as taught by Smith in order to achieve both high data rate and low error rate (Smith, [0010]).
Claims 36 and 48 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over You in view of Li as applied to claims 31 and 42 above, and further in view of Hui et al. (US 2019/0158226 A1), hereafter referred Hui.
Regarding claims 36, You in view of Li teaches the device according to claim 31 above. Further, You teaches wherein the instructions to perform outer-code decoding on the outer-code encoded data generates outer-code decoded data (You, Fig. 9, [0125]; information to which a plurality of channel codes are sequentially applied may be transmitted/received, where figure 9 illustrates the inner code decoding block performs inner-code decoding on its input which is outer-code encoded and inner-code encoded data, and outputs to the outer code decoding block data that would have been inner code decoded).
You in view of Li does not expressly teach wherein the outer-code decoded data is data on which outer-code encoding and data extraction are performed.
However, Hui teaches wherein the outer-code decoded data is data on which outer-code encoding and data extraction are performed (Hui, [0075]; the coded bits are passed through a deinterleaver that extracts the decoded data bits u and depends on the interleaving mapping used in the interleaved concatenated polar encoder).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the effective filing date of the invention to create the invention of You in view of Li to include the above recited limitations as taught by Hui in order to reduce the overall decoding latency (Hui, [0060]).
Regarding claim 48, You in view of Li teaches the device according to claim 42 above. Further, You teaches wherein the instructions to perform outer-code decoding on the inner-code decoded data generates outer-code decoded data (You, Fig. 9, [0125]; information to which a plurality of channel codes are sequentially applied may be transmitted/received, where figure 9 illustrates the inner code decoding block performs inner-code decoding on its input which is outer-code encoded and inner-code encoded data, and outputs to the outer code decoding block data that would have been inner code decoded).
You in view of Li does not expressly teach wherein the outer-code decoded data is data on which inner-code decoding and data extraction are performed.
However, Hui teaches wherein the outer-code decoded data is data on which inner-code decoding and data extraction are performed (Hui, [0075]; the coded bits are passed through a deinterleaver that extracts the decoded data bits u and depends on the interleaving mapping used in the interleaved concatenated polar encoder).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the effective filing date of the invention to create the invention of You in view of Li to include the above recited limitations as taught by Hui in order to reduce the overall decoding latency (Hui, [0060]).
Claims 41, 49, 51, and 60 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over You in view of Li as applied to claims 31, 42, and 57 above, and further in view of Xi et al. (US 2019/0140784 A1), hereafter referred Xi.
Regarding claims 41, You in view of Li teaches the device according to claim 31 above. Further, You teaches wherein the inner-code encoded data is data on which outer-code encoding and data processing are performed (You, Fig. 9, [0125]; information to which a plurality of channel codes are sequentially applied may be transmitted/received, where figure 9 illustrates the inner code decoding block performs inner-code decoding on its input which is outer-code encoded and inner-code encoded data, and outputs to the outer code decoding block data that would have been inner code decoded).
You in view of Li does not expressly teach the data processing comprises first interleaving.
However, Xi teaches the data processing comprises first interleaving (Xi, Fig. 2, [0066]-[0070]; at the transmitter the outer encoder encodes the data with an outer code to generate an outer frame, the outer frame is interleaved by the interleaver to produce an intermediate frame which is encoded by the inner encoder to generate a final frame. The data is transmitted across the channel and decoded at the receiver in reverse order. In particular, at the receiver, the inner coder decodes the data at the receiver then the outer coder decodes the same data after it is de-interleaved by the de-interleaver).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the effective filing date of the invention to create the invention of You in view of Li to include the above recited limitations as taught by Xi in order to correct any remaining errors not corrected by the inner decoder (Xi, [0069]).
Regarding claims 49 and 60, You in view of Li teaches the device according to claim 42 and the method according to claim 57 above. Further, You teaches wherein:
the outer-code encoded and inner-code encoded data is data on which data processing is performed after outer-code encoding and before inner-code encoding (You, Fig. 9, [0125]; information to which a plurality of channel codes are sequentially applied may be transmitted/received, where figure 9 illustrates the inner code decoding block performs inner-code decoding on its input which is outer-code encoded and inner-code encoded data, and outputs to the outer code decoding block data that would have been inner code decoded).
You in view of Li does not expressly teach the program includes further instructions to: perform inverse processing of the data processing on the inner-code decoded data, wherein the inverse processing comprises second de-interleaving, wherein the data processing comprises first interleaving.
However, Xi teaches the program includes further instructions to: perform inverse processing of the data processing on the inner-code decoded data, wherein the inverse processing comprises second de-interleaving, wherein the data processing comprises first interleaving (Xi, Fig. 2, [0066]-[0070]; at the transmitter the outer encoder encodes the data with an outer code to generate an outer frame, the outer frame is interleaved by the interleaver to produce an intermediate frame which is encoded by the inner encoder to generate a final frame. The data is transmitted across the channel and decoded at the receiver in reverse order. In particular, at the receiver, the inner coder decodes the data at the receiver then the outer coder decodes the same data after it is de-interleaved by the de-interleaver).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the effective filing date of the invention to create the invention of You in view of Li to include the above recited limitations as taught by Xi in order to correct any remaining errors not corrected by the inner decoder (Xi, [0069]).
Regarding claim 51, You in view of Li teaches the device according to claim 42 above. Further, You teaches wherein:
the outer-code encoded and inner-code encoded data is data on which data processing is performed after outer-code encoding and before inner-code encoding (You, Fig. 9, [0125]; information to which a plurality of channel codes are sequentially applied may be transmitted/received, where figure 9 illustrates the inner code decoding block performs inner-code decoding on its input which is outer-code encoded and inner-code encoded data, and outputs to the outer code decoding block data that would have been inner code decoded).
You in view of Li does not expressly teach the program includes further instructions to:
perform inverse processing of the data processing on the inner-code decoded data, wherein the inverse processing comprises second de-interleaving; and
output the inner-code decoded and inverse processed data,
wherein the data processing comprises first interleaving.
However, Xi teaches the program includes further instructions to:
perform inverse processing of the data processing on the inner-code decoded data, wherein the inverse processing comprises second de-interleaving; and output the inner-code decoded and inverse processed data, wherein the data processing comprises first interleaving (Xi, Fig. 2, [0066]-[0070]; at the transmitter the outer encoder encodes the data with an outer code to generate an outer frame, the outer frame is interleaved by the interleaver to produce an intermediate frame which is encoded by the inner encoder to generate a final frame. The data is transmitted across the channel and decoded at the receiver in reverse order. In particular, at the receiver, the inner coder decodes the data at the receiver then the outer coder decodes the same data after it is de-interleaved by the de-interleaver).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the effective filing date of the invention to create the invention of You in view of Li to include the above recited limitations as taught by Xi in order to correct any remaining errors not corrected by the inner decoder (Xi, [0069]).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. See PTO-892.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to RODRICK MAK whose telephone number is (571)270-0284. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 9:30 am - 5:30 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, Noel Beharry can be reached at 571-270-5630. 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.
/R.M./Examiner, Art Unit 2416
/NOEL R BEHARRY/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2416