DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
1. The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Cross Reference to Related Applications
2. This application is a Divisional of U.S. Non-provisional Patent Application Serial No. 17/152,764, entitled “Methods and Apparatus for Signaling of Network Coding Information to Facilitate Feedback Processing” and filed on January 19, 2021, which claims the benefit of U.S. Provisional Patent Application Serial No. 63/010,582, entitled “Methods and Apparatus for Signaling of Network Coding Information to Facilitate Feedback Processing” and filed on April 15, 2020, which are expressly incorporated by reference in their entirety.
Claims status
3. Based on the Response to Restriction Requirement filed on January 14, 2026, applicant elects, to prosecute Group I, as claims 1-10, 16-22 and 23-31 without traverse. Claims 11-15 have been withdrawn and cancelled. Claims 32-36 are added. Therefore, claims 1-10 and 16-36 are pending for examination.
Drawings
4. The Examiner contends that the drawings submitted on August 24, 2023 are acceptable for examination proceedings.
Information Disclosure Statement
5. The Examiner has considered the reference(s) listed on the Information Disclosure Statement submitted on August 24, 2023.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
6. 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.
7. Claims 1-6, 9-10, 16-17, 21-28 and 31-33 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Brueck et al. (US 2013/0148563 A1), hereinafter “Brueck” in view of WELIN et al. (US 2018/0331781 A1), hereinafter “Welin”.
Regarding claim 1, Brueck discloses an apparatus for wireless communication at a base station (Figs.5, 11, 13C, network coding scenario operable by an evolved Node B (eNB) associating with plurality of UEs), comprising: at least one memory; and at least one processor coupled to the at least one memory (paragraphs [0078]-[0080], implemented in hardware, software, firmware, or any combination) and configured to cause the base station to:
receive, from a transmitting device or a receiving device (Figs.5, 11, network coding operation in a wireless network), a request to update network coding information for the wireless communication (paragraphs [0060], [0067], uplink feedback based on its ability to decode the packets); and
transmit network coding information (paragraphs [0059], [0072], network coded packet based on ACK/NACK) to at least one of the transmitting device or the receiving device in response to the request (paragraphs [0059], [0072], scrambling a PDCCH message with the network coding identifier).
While Brueck implicitly refers to “a request to update network coding information” and “updated network coding information”, Welin from the same or similar field of endeavor explicitly discloses a request to update network coding information for the wireless communication (paragraphs [0058]-[0060], [0074]-[0075], instruction message to increase or decrease overshoot) and updated network coding information (paragraphs [0058]-[0060], [0074]-[0075], updated coding parameter value and adjusts current coding parameter value to the updated coding parameter value).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention was made to provide “a request to update network coding information for the wireless communication” and “updated network coding information” as taught by Welin, in the system of Brueck, so that it would provide efficient installed communication resources in Network Coding controlled communication networks in order to meet future demands for increased transmission rates of data (Welin, paragraph [0012]).
Regarding claim 2, Brueck discloses the transmitting device is a first user equipment (UE) and the receiving device is a second UE (Fig. 5, paragraph [0043], UEs 120a-120d are part of same network).
Regarding claim 3, Brueck discloses the at least one processor is further configured to cause the base station to send one or more configurations for the updated network coding information to the transmitting device and the receiving device (Fig. 5, paragraph [0043], eNB 110 sends data to four UEs (relays in the illustration) 120 a-120 d deployed on four train cars; UEs 120 a-120 d are a part of the same network coding group M).
Regarding claim 4, Brueck discloses to transmit the updated network coding information, the at least one processor is configured to transmit the updated network coding information to the transmitting device and the receiving device in response to at least one of the request from the transmitting device or the request from the receiving device (Figs.5, 11, 13C, paragraphs [0059], [0060], [0067], [0072], network coded packet based on ACK/NACK and scrambling a PDCCH message with the network coding identifier).
While Brueck implicitly refers to “a request to update network coding information” and “updated network coding information”, Welin from the same or similar field of endeavor explicitly discloses a request to update network coding information for the wireless communication (paragraphs [0058]-[0060], [0074]-[0075], instruction message to increase or decrease overshoot) and updated network coding information (paragraphs [0058]-[0060], [0074]-[0075], updated coding parameter value and adjusts current coding parameter value to the updated coding parameter value).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention was made to provide “a request to update network coding information for the wireless communication” and “updated network coding information” as taught by Welin, in the system of Brueck, so that it would provide efficient installed communication resources in Network Coding controlled communication networks in order to meet future demands for increased transmission rates of data (Welin, paragraph [0012]).
Regarding claim 5, Brueck in view of Welin disclose the apparatus according to claim 1.
Welin further discloses the transmitting device or the receiving device is a user equipment (UE) with which the base station exchanges encoded data packets, and the request is from the UE (Fig. 4, paragraphs [0074]-[0075], network decoding module determines a performance of the decoding).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention was made to provide “the transmitting device or the receiving device is a user equipment (UE) with which the base station exchanges encoded data packets, and the request is from the UE” as taught by Welin, in the system of Brueck, so that it would provide efficient installed communication resources in Network Coding controlled communication networks in order to meet future demands for increased transmission rates of data (Welin, paragraph [0012]).
Regarding claim 6, Brueck discloses the request is in uplink control information (UCI) or a medium access control-control element (MAC-CE) from the transmitting device or the receiving device (paragraph [0063], PUCCH format that supports large ACK/NACK).
Regarding claim 9, Brueck discloses wherein to transmit the updated network coding information, the at least one processor is configured to transmit the updated network coding information to the at least one of the transmitting device or the receiving device in at least one of: a radio resource control (RRC) configuration, a medium access control-control element (MAC-CE), or downlink control information (DCI) (paragraph [0059], in the DCI format in accordance with the present disclosure, in order to allow the device to decode an XOR combined packet, the modulation and coding scheme (MCS) must be signaled for the XOR group of size K).
Regarding claim 10, Brueck discloses at least one transceiver coupled to the at least one processor (Figs.5, 11, 13C, paragraphs [0078]-[0080], a network coding scenario operable by an evolved Node B (eNB) associating with plurality of UEs; implemented in hardware, software, firmware, or any combination).
Regarding claim 16, Brueck discloses an apparatus for wireless communication at a user equipment (UE) (Figs.5, 9-11, 13C, a network coding scenario operable by an evolved Node B (eNB) associating with plurality of UEs), comprising: at least one memory; and at least one processor coupled to the at least one memory (paragraphs [0078]-[0080], implemented in hardware, software, firmware, or any combination) and configured to cause the UE to:
receive network coding information from a base station (paragraphs [0065]-[0066], RRC configuration including RNTIs for network coding of M UEs);
receive encoded data packets from a transmitting device (paragraphs [0043], [0071], NC code identifier facilitating identification and decoding data transmission);
transmit a request for a change in network coding parameters to the base station based on network coding performance being below a threshold (paragraphs [0060], [0067], uplink feedback based on its ability to decode the packets); and
receive updated network coding information from the base station in response to the request (paragraphs [0059], [0072], scrambling a PDCCH message with the network coding identifier).
While Brueck implicitly refers to “a request for a change in network coding parameters to the base station based on network coding performance being below a threshold” and “updated network coding information”, Welin from the same or similar field of endeavor explicitly discloses a request for a change in network coding parameters to the base station based on network coding performance being below a threshold (paragraphs [0058]-[0060], [0074]-[0075], instruction message to increase or decrease overshoot) and updated network coding information (paragraphs [0058]-[0060], [0074]-[0075], updated coding parameter value and adjusts current coding parameter value to the updated coding parameter value).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention was made to provide “a request for a change in network coding parameters to the base station based on network coding performance being below a threshold” and “updated network coding information” as taught by Welin, in the system of Brueck, so that it would provide efficient installed communication resources in Network Coding controlled communication networks in order to meet future demands for increased transmission rates of data (Welin, paragraph [0012]).
Regarding claim 17, the claim is rejected based on the same reasoning as presented in the rejection of claim 6.
Regarding claim 21, the claim is rejected based on the same reasoning as presented in the rejection of claim 2.
Regarding claim 22, Brueck discloses a transceiver coupled to the at least one processor, wherein the UE is configured to receive the network coding information, transmit the request, and receive the updated network coding information via the transceiver (Figs.5, 11, 13C, paragraphs [0059]-[0060], [0065]-[0067], [0072], [0078]-[0080], network coding scenario operable by an evolved Node B (eNB) associating with plurality of UE and implemented in hardware, software, firmware, or any combination).
Regarding claim 23, the claim is rejected based on the same reasoning as presented in the rejection of claim 1.
Regarding claim 24, the claim is rejected based on the same reasoning as presented in the rejection of claim 2.
Regarding claim 25, the claim is rejected based on the same reasoning as presented in the rejection of claim 3.
Regarding claim 26, the claim is rejected based on the same reasoning as presented in the rejection of claim 4.
Regarding claim 27, the claim is rejected based on the same reasoning as presented in the rejection of claim 5.
Regarding claim 28, the claim is rejected based on the same reasoning as presented in the rejection of claim 6.
Regarding claim 31, the claim is rejected based on the same reasoning as presented in the rejection of claim 9.
Regarding claim 32, the claim is rejected based on the same reasoning as presented in the rejection of claim 16.
Regarding claim 33, the claim is rejected based on the same reasoning as presented in the rejection of claim 17.
8. Claims 7-8, 18-20, 29-30 and 34-36 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Brueck et al. (US 2013/0148563 A1), hereinafter “Brueck” in view of WELIN et al. (US 2018/0331781 A1), hereinafter “Welin” in view of Kim et al. (US 2015/0063211 A1), hereinafter “Kim”.
Regarding claim 7, Brueck in view of Welin disclose the apparatus according to claim 1.
While Brueck in view of Welin implicitly refer to “the updated network coding information includes one or more of: a network coding algorithm, at least one network coding parameter, a trigger to switch network coding algorithms, or a time offset to the network coding algorithms”, Kim from the same or similar field of endeavor explicitly discloses the updated network coding information includes one or more of: a network coding algorithm, at least one network coding parameter, a trigger to switch network coding algorithms, or a time offset to the network coding algorithms (Fig. 10, paragraph [0099], in operation 1055, the BSs (or APs) 1010 and 1020 may transmit scheduling information of packet transmission updated through operations 1052 and 1054 to the UE 1030; that is, the BSs (or APs) 1010 and 1020 may transmit information on the packet combinations and the transmission sequences of the packet combinations to the UE 1030)).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention was made to provide “the updated network coding information includes one or more of: a network coding algorithm, at least one network coding parameter, a trigger to switch network coding algorithms, or a time offset to the network coding algorithms” as taught by Kim, in the combined system of Brueck and Welin, so that it would provide performance of a multipath protocol improved by preventing a packet loss and a coding gain using the network coding (Kim, paragraph [0002]).
Regarding claim 8, Brueck discloses the updated network coding information includes the at least one network coding parameter, comprising a decoding procedure (paragraph [0059], decoding XOR combined packet).
Regarding claim 18, Brueck in view of Welin disclose the apparatus according to claim 16.
While Brueck in view of Welin implicitly refer to “the network coding performance is based on network decoding results of the UE”, Kim from the same or similar field of endeavor explicitly discloses the network coding performance is based on network decoding results of the UE (Figs. 6, 10, paragraphs [0067]-[0068], [0095], [0100], packets decoding corresponding packets to reproduce contents corresponding to the packets).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention was made to provide “the network coding performance is based on network decoding results of the UE” as taught by Kim, in the combined system of Brueck and Welin, so that it would provide performance of a multipath protocol improved by preventing a packet loss and a coding gain using the network coding (Kim, paragraph [0002]).
Regarding claim 19, the claim is rejected based on the same reasoning as presented in the rejection of claim 7.
Regarding claim 20, the claim is rejected based on the same reasoning as presented in the rejection of claim 8.
Regarding claim 29, the claim is rejected based on the same reasoning as presented in the rejection of claim 7.
Regarding claim 30, the claim is rejected based on the same reasoning as presented in the rejection of claim 8.
Regarding claim 34, the claim is rejected based on the same reasoning as presented in the rejection of claim 18.
Regarding claim 35, the claim is rejected based on the same reasoning as presented in the rejection of claim 19.
Regarding claim 36, the claim is rejected based on the same reasoning as presented in the rejection of claim 20.
Conclusion
9. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SITHU KO whose telephone number is 571-272-8647. The examiner can normally be reached on Mon-Friday 8:30am-5:00pmEST.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Edan Orgad can be reached on 571-272-7884. 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.
/SITHU KO/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2414