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 .
Response to Arguments
Applicant's amendment and arguments filed 03/03/2026 with respect to claim(s) 1, 17, and 20 have been considered but are moot in view of the new ground(s) of rejection under 103 as being unpatentable over Sundman et al. (US 2019/0115999 A1) in view of new reference Wang et al. (US 2019/0260497 A1). Applicant’s argument: Applicant argues that Sundman does not disclose the new limitation “wherein the selection corresponds to multiple link adaptation test portions of the plurality of link adaptation test portions each having a link quality metric that satisfies a threshold.” Examiner’s response: Examiner submits that Sundman at least teaches “wherein the selection corresponds to multiple link adaptation test portions of the plurality of link adaptation test portions each having a link quality metric” in Fig. 4, [0031]: The second TRX 140 attempts to decode 1.2 the received LAF by performing a decoding operation on the first data using the first MCS and a decoding operation on the second data using the second MCS, and [0005]: there is a possibility for a receiver to suggest an MCS to the transmitter using an MCS feedback field in the HT Control field… Using the MCS feedback, the challenge is for the receiver to estimate which MCS to suggest for the feedback. One alternative is to estimate the SNR of a previously transmitted packet and use this SNR estimate to choose the right MCS… There are other alternatives to estimate the MCS based on link quality, for example using mutual information or Received Signal Strength Indication, RSSI. For example, based on Fig. 4 and [0005], [0031], the second transceiver receives a first data coded with a first MCS and a second data coded with a second MCS, and estimates which MCS to suggest for feedback by estimating an SNR and/or link quality, such as RSSI. New reference Wang teaches that “the multiple link adaptation test portions … each having a link quality metric that satisfies a threshold” in [0056]: the first communication device 101 may use a different MCS for the first part than that used for the second part. This is in order to be able to provide feedback, that is, channel knowledge (=link quality metric), to the second communication device 102 on two different MCSs, and therefore allow either or both of the first communication device 101 and the second communication device 102 to perform link adaptation based on the feedback received from second communication device 102, and [0076]: the first communication device 101 may perform link adaptation based on the feedback received from the second communication device 102 on the transmission with the first MCS, and the second MCS (=multiple link adaptation test portions). For example, if the reception of the second part with the second MCS was more successful, that is, the padding or the additional data were received with fewer errors by the second communication device, than data received with the first MCS (=satisfies a threshold), the first communication device 101 may decide to use the second MCS for future transmissions to e.g., the second communication device 102). For example, based on [0056] and [0076], either first communication device and second communication device may use feedback to perform link adaptation. The feedback may be channel knowledge on two different MCSs used for two data parts. Both data parts were successfully received because of low errors but one data part encoded with an MCS was received more successful because it was received with fewer errors than the other data part with the other MCS. Sundman is combined with Wang to teach that a selection of an MCS from different data coded with different MCS based on SNR and/or RSSI can also correspond to the different data being received successfully with low error indicative of channel knowledge. Doing so helps to carry out link adaptation by enabling an AP to get periodic feedback on different MCSs which improves transmission efficiency in terms of data throughput (Wang: [0103]-[0104]).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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.
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.
Claim(s) 1-2, 4-5, 11, and 17-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sundman et al. (US 2019/0115999 A1) in view of Wang et al. (US 2019/0260497 A1).
Regarding claims 1 and 20, Sundman discloses An apparatus of a first wireless device, comprising (claim 1) and A method for wireless communication at a first wireless device, comprising (claim 20) (Fig. 3, abstract: A method is disclosed performed by a second transceiver (140) of a packet based wireless communication network (100) for wireless communication with a first transceiver (130) of the network. Figs. 4 and 14: first transceiver (TRX1) 130):
one or more memories storing processor-executable code (Fig. 14, [0071]: memory 804 contains instructions); and
one or more processors coupled with the one or more memories and individually or collectively operable to execute the code to cause the first wireless device to (Fig. 14, [0071]: processor 803 coupled to memory 804 and executes the instructions contained in memory 804):
transmit, to a second wireless device, a first packet that includes a plurality of link adaptation test portions generated using a plurality of transmission rate options and a header that indicates the plurality of transmission rate options for the plurality of link adaptation test portions (Fig. 4, [0031]: the TRX 130 sends 1.1 to the second TRX 140 a link adaptation frame, LAF, comprising first data coded with a first MCS and second data coded with a second MCS. The first TRX may also send information of the coding, i.e. that the first data is coded with the first MCS and the second data is coded with the second MCS to the second TRX 140, i.e. in a header of the LAF);
receive, from the second wireless device, feedback information based at least in part on the first packet, the feedback information indicating a selection of one of the plurality of transmission rate options to use for communication of a subsequent packet (Fig. 4, [0031]: The second TRX 140 attempts to decode 1.2 the received LAF by performing a decoding operation on the first data using the first MCS and a decoding operation on the second data using the second MCS. The second TRX 140 selects the most appropriate MCS to use for communication between the first TRX and the second TRX based on the result of the decoding operations. The second TRX may then send 1.3 information of the selected MCS to the first TRX 130), wherein the selection corresponds to multiple link adaptation test portions of the plurality of link adaptation test portions each having a link quality metric (Fig. 4, [0031]: The second TRX 140 attempts to decode 1.2 the received LAF by performing a decoding operation on the first data using the first MCS and a decoding operation on the second data using the second MCS. [0005]: there is a possibility for a receiver to suggest an MCS to the transmitter using an MCS feedback field in the HT Control field… Using the MCS feedback, the challenge is for the receiver to estimate which MCS to suggest for the feedback. One alternative is to estimate the SNR of a previously transmitted packet and use this SNR estimate to choose the right MCS… There are other alternatives to estimate the MCS based on link quality, for example using mutual information or Received Signal Strength Indication, RSSI); and
transmit, to the second wireless device and based at least in part on the feedback information, the subsequent packet using a first transmission rate option of the plurality of transmission rate options (Fig. 4, [0031]: The first TRX then responds by sending further data to the second TRX 140 using the selected MCS).
Sundman does not disclose, but Wang discloses the multiple link adaptation test portions … each having a link quality metric that satisfies a threshold ([0056]: the first communication device 101 may use a different MCS for the first part than that used for the second part. This is in order to be able to provide feedback, that is, channel knowledge (=link quality metric), to the second communication device 102 on two different MCSs, and therefore allow either or both of the first communication device 101 and the second communication device 102 to perform link adaptation based on the feedback received from second communication device 102. [0076]: the first communication device 101 may perform link adaptation based on the feedback received from the second communication device 102 on the transmission with the first MCS, and the second MCS (=multiple link adaptation test portions). For example, if the reception of the second part with the second MCS was more successful, that is, the padding or the additional data were received with fewer errors by the second communication device, than data received with the first MCS (=satisfies a threshold), the first communication device 101 may decide to use the second MCS for future transmissions to e.g., the second communication device 102).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the first data coded with first MCS and the second data coded second MCS, as taught by Sundman, to be successfully received in terms of errors indicative of the channel knowledge where one data part was more successfully received with fewer errors than the other data part, as taught by Wang.
Doing so helps to carry out link adaptation by enabling an AP to get periodic feedback on different MCSs which improves transmission efficiency in terms of data throughput (Wang: [0103]-[0104]).
Regarding claim(s) 2, Sundman in view of Wang discloses all features of claim(s) 1 as outlined above.
Sundman discloses wherein the plurality of link adaptation test portions includes a first portion modulated using a first modulation and coding scheme (MCS) and a second portion modulated using a second MCS (Fig. 4, [0031]: the TRX 130 sends 1.1 to the second TRX 140 a link adaptation frame, LAF, comprising first data coded with a first MCS and second data coded with a second MCS).
Regarding claim(s) 4, Sundman in view of Wang discloses all features of claim(s) 1 as outlined above.
Sundman discloses wherein the first packet includes an indication to cause the second wireless device to receive the plurality of link adaptation test portions using the plurality of transmission rate options ([0031]: a link adaptation frame, LAF, comprising first data coded with a first MCS and second data coded with a second MCS. The first TRX may also send information of the coding, i.e. that the first data is coded with the first MCS and the second data is coded with the second MCS to the second TRX 140, i.e. in a header of the LAF. The second TRX 140 attempts to decode 1.2 the received LAF by performing a decoding operation on the first data using the first MCS and a decoding operation on the second data using the second MCS) and provide the feedback information based at least in part on the plurality of link adaptation test portions ([0031]: The second TRX 140 attempts to decode 1.2 the received LAF by performing a decoding operation on the first data using the first MCS and a decoding operation on the second data using the second MCS. The second TRX 140 selects the most appropriate MCS to use for communication between the first TRX and the second TRX based on the result of the decoding operations. The second TRX may then send 1.3 information of the selected MCS to the first TRX 130).
Regarding claim(s) 5, Sundman in view of Wang discloses all features of claim(s) 1 as outlined above.
Sundman discloses wherein the first packet is a dedicated link adaptation test packet having a format specified by a link adaptation protocol ([0047]: a special frame called Link Adaptation Frame, LAF, is introduced. The LAF is to be used for fast link adaptation. The LAF comprises different segments each segment being coded using a different MCS. The following description is directed towards the Wifi standard 802.11 ah, however it is straight forward to consider constructions for other communication standards, such as other Wifi standards. The LAF is to be sent from a first transceiver to a second transceiver and used by the second transceiver to determine a suitable MCS to be used for communication between the first and second transceiver).
Regarding claim(s) 11, Sundman in view of Wang discloses all features of claim(s) 1 as outlined above.
Sundman discloses wherein the feedback information indicates the first transmission rate option selected by the second wireless device (Fig. 4, [0031]: The second TRX 140 attempts to decode 1.2 the received LAF by performing a decoding operation on the first data using the first MCS and a decoding operation on the second data using the second MCS. The second TRX 140 selects the most appropriate MCS to use for communication between the first TRX and the second TRX based on the result of the decoding operations. The second TRX may then send 1.3 information of the selected MCS to the first TRX 130).
Regarding claim 17, Sundman discloses An apparatus of a second wireless device, comprising (Fig. 3, abstract: A method is disclosed performed by a second transceiver (140) of a packet based wireless communication network (100) for wireless communication with a first transceiver (130) of the network. Figs. 4 and 14: second transceiver (TRX2) 140):
one or more memories storing processor-executable code (Fig. 12, [0063]: memory 604 contains instructions); and
one or more processors coupled with the one or more memories and individually or collectively operable to execute the code to cause the second wireless device to (Fig. 12, [0063]: processor 603 coupled to memory 604 and executes the instructions contained in memory 604):
receive, from a first wireless device via a wireless channel, a first packet that includes a plurality of link adaptation test portions generated using a plurality of transmission rate options and a header that indicates the plurality of transmission rate options for the plurality of link adaptation test portions (Fig. 4, [0031]: the TRX 130 sends 1.1 to the second TRX 140 a link adaptation frame, LAF, comprising first data coded with a first MCS and second data coded with a second MCS. The first TRX may also send information of the coding, i.e. that the first data is coded with the first MCS and the second data is coded with the second MCS to the second TRX 140, i.e. in a header of the LAF. Fig. 3, [0030]: a first transceiver, TRX 130 and a second TRX 140 that may communicate wirelessly with each other);
transmit, to the first wireless device, feedback information based at least in part on the plurality of link adaptation test portions (Fig. 4, [0031]: The second TRX 140 attempts to decode 1.2 the received LAF by performing a decoding operation on the first data using the first MCS and a decoding operation on the second data using the second MCS. The second TRX 140 selects the most appropriate MCS to use for communication between the first TRX and the second TRX based on the result of the decoding operations. The second TRX may then send 1.3 information of the selected MCS to the first TRX 130), wherein the selection corresponds to multiple link adaptation test portions of the plurality of link adaptation test portions each having a link quality metric (Fig. 4, [0031]: The second TRX 140 attempts to decode 1.2 the received LAF by performing a decoding operation on the first data using the first MCS and a decoding operation on the second data using the second MCS. [0005]: there is a possibility for a receiver to suggest an MCS to the transmitter using an MCS feedback field in the HT Control field… Using the MCS feedback, the challenge is for the receiver to estimate which MCS to suggest for the feedback. One alternative is to estimate the SNR of a previously transmitted packet and use this SNR estimate to choose the right MCS… There are other alternatives to estimate the MCS based on link quality, for example using mutual information or Received Signal Strength Indication, RSSI); and
receive, from the first wireless device via the wireless channel and based at least in part on the feedback information, the subsequent packet transmitted using a first transmission rate option of the plurality of transmission rate options (Fig. 4, [0031]: The first TRX then responds by sending further data to the second TRX 140 using the selected MCS. Fig. 3, [0030]: a first transceiver, TRX 130 and a second TRX 140 that may communicate wirelessly with each other).
Sundman does not disclose, but Wang discloses the multiple link adaptation test portions … each having a link quality metric that satisfies a threshold ([0056]: the first communication device 101 may use a different MCS for the first part than that used for the second part. This is in order to be able to provide feedback, that is, channel knowledge (=link quality metric), to the second communication device 102 on two different MCSs, and therefore allow either or both of the first communication device 101 and the second communication device 102 to perform link adaptation based on the feedback received from second communication device 102. [0076]: the first communication device 101 may perform link adaptation based on the feedback received from the second communication device 102 on the transmission with the first MCS, and the second MCS (=multiple link adaptation test portions). For example, if the reception of the second part with the second MCS was more successful, that is, the padding or the additional data were received with fewer errors by the second communication device, than data received with the first MCS (=satisfies a threshold), the first communication device 101 may decide to use the second MCS for future transmissions to e.g., the second communication device 102).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the first data coded with first MCS and the second data coded second MCS, as taught by Sundman, to be successfully received in terms of errors indicative of the channel knowledge where one data part was more successfully received with fewer errors than the other data part, as taught by Wang.
Doing so helps to carry out link adaptation by enabling an AP to get periodic feedback on different MCSs which improves transmission efficiency in terms of data throughput (Wang: [0103]-[0104]).
Regarding claim(s) 18, Sundman in view of Wang discloses all features of claim(s) 17 as outlined above.
Sundman discloses wherein the plurality of link adaptation test portions includes a first portion modulated using a first modulation and coding scheme (MCS) and a second portion modulated using a second MCS (Fig. 4, [0031]: the TRX 130 sends 1.1 to the second TRX 140 a link adaptation frame, LAF, comprising first data coded with a first MCS and second data coded with a second MCS).
Regarding claim(s) 19, Sundman in view of Wang discloses all features of claim(s) 17 as outlined above.
Sundman discloses wherein the one or more processors are individually or collectively further operable to execute the code to cause the first wireless device to:
select the first transmission rate option based at least in part on the plurality of link adaptation test portions (Fig. 4, [0031]: The second TRX 140 attempts to decode 1.2 the received LAF by performing a decoding operation on the first data using the first MCS and a decoding operation on the second data using the second MCS. The second TRX 140 selects the most appropriate MCS to use for communication between the first TRX and the second TRX based on the result of the decoding operations. The second TRX may then send 1.3 information of the selected MCS to the first TRX 130).
Claim(s) 3 and 14 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sundman et al. (US 2019/0115999 A1) in view of Wang et al. (US 2019/0260497 A1) and Kong et al. (US 2016/0242233 A1).
Regarding claim(s) 3, Sundman in view of Wang discloses all features of claim(s) 1 as outlined above.
Sundman does not disclose, but Kong discloses wherein the first packet has a format based at least in part on a null data packet (NDP) defined for a wireless local area network (WLAN) associated with the first wireless device (Fig. 8, [0108]: AP transmits an NDP to STAs. The NDP follows the format of a PPDU excluding the data field. [0097]: link adaptation procedure in a WLAN system can be realized by using a PPDU or a NDP).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the LAF, as taught by Sundman, to be an NDP in a WLAN system, respectively, as taught by Kong.
Doing so allows the STA to perform channel estimation based on the NDP and provide a link adaptation method (Kong: [0107]-[0108]) and realize a link adaptation procedure in a WLAN system (Kong: [0097]).
Regarding claim(s) 14, Sundman in view of Wang discloses all features of claim(s) 1 as outlined above.
Sundman does not disclose, but Kong discloses wherein:
to receive the feedback information, the one or more processors are individually or collectively further operable to execute the code to cause the first wireless device to receive an acknowledgement (ACK) message in response to the first packet ([0100]: AP receives, from a STA, a BA frame including MCS feedback (MFB) information in response to the PPDU. [0108], [0116]: an NDP can also be used which follows the format of the PPDU to obtain MCS feedback information from the STA); and
the ACK message includes a field populated with the feedback information ([0100]: MFB information is included in the BA frame).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the information of the selected MCS, as taught by Sundman, to be included in a BA frame that is transmitted in response to receiving an NDP, as taught by Kong.
Doing so provides a link adaptation method where each STA can perform channel estimation and transmit the information in a BA frame (Kong: [0107]-[0108], [0100]).
Claim(s) 6-7 and 12-13 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sundman et al. (US 2019/0115999 A1) in view of Wang et al. (US 2019/0260497 A1) and Chou et al. (US 2016/0142177 A1).
Regarding claim(s) 6, Sundman in view of Wang discloses all features of claim(s) 1 as outlined above.
Sundman does not disclose, but Chou discloses wherein the first packet further comprises upper layer data for the second wireless device (Figs. 7-8, [0045]-[0046]: the data packet comprises a preamble and is transmitted to the receiver. [0034]: the preamble is not coded and consists of 10 repetitions of the 00111100b bit pattern).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the LAF, as taught by Sundman, to include a preamble, as taught by Chou.
Doing so allows the transmitter to transmit the preamble because it is not coded and be received at LE 1M (Chou: [0034]).
Regarding claim(s) 7, Sundman in view of Wang and Chou discloses all features of claim(s) 6 as outlined above.
Sundman does not disclose, but Chou discloses wherein the upper layer data is included in a separate portion of the first packet that is different from the plurality of link adaptation test portions (Figs. 7-8, [0045]-[0046]: the data packet comprises the preamble, the first packet portion, and the second packet portion).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the LAF, as taught by Sundman, to include a preamble that is separate from the first packet portion and the second packet portion, as taught by Chou.
Doing so allows the transmitter to transmit the preamble because it is not coded and be received at LE 1M (Chou: [0034]).
Regarding claim(s) 12, Sundman in view of Wang discloses all features of claim(s) 1 as outlined above.
Sundman does not disclose, but Chou discloses wherein the feedback information indicates one or more link quality metrics related to the plurality of link adaptation test portions, and the first transmission rate option is based at least in part on the one or more link quality metrics ([0010], [0038]: the receiver may provide link quality feedback information to the transmitter via LMP message. [0041]: the recommendation / feedback indicates a recommended data rate based on the receiver’s link quality).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the information of the selected MCS, as taught by Sundman, to include link quality feedback information indicating a recommended data rate based on the receiver’s link quality, as taught by Chou.
Doing so allows the receiver to provide link quality feedback information to the transmitter using fast link adaptation with recommendation or feedback from the receiving device (Chou: [0038], [0041]).
Regarding claim(s) 13, Sundman in view of Wang and Chou discloses all features of claim(s) 12 as outlined above.
Sundman does not disclose, but Chou discloses wherein the one or more link quality metrics include at least one member selected from a group consisting of:
a signal to noise ratio (SNR) ([0013]: link adaptation can be achieved to improve link quality with varying SNRs),
a signal to interference plus noise ratio (SINR), or
an error vector magnitude (EVM).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the information of the selected MCS, as taught by Sundman, to include link quality feedback information indicating a recommended data rate based on the receiver’s link quality to improve link quality with varying SNRs, as taught by Chou.
Doing so allows the receiver to provide link quality feedback information to the transmitter using fast link adaptation with recommendation or feedback from the receiving device (Chou: [0038], [0041]).
Claim(s) 8-10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sundman et al. (US 2019/0115999 A1) in view of Wang et al. (US 2019/0260497 A1) and Taghavi Nasrabadi et al. (US 2012/0263141 A1).
Regarding claim(s) 8, Sundman in view of Wang discloses all features of claim(s) 1 as outlined above.
Sundman does not disclose, but Taghavi Nasrabadi discloses wherein the plurality of link adaptation test portions includes a first portion that is modulated in a first set of tones of an orthogonal frequency division multiplexed (OFDM) symbol and a second portion that is modulated in a second set of tones of the OFDM symbol (Fig. 8, [0086]-[0087]: a packet comprises different portions that are repeated in the frequency domain of a given time segment 804, also referred to as OFDM symbol, in multiple available frequency ranges 802, also referred to as tones. The packet is modulated with a modulation scheme defining the rate of bit transmission per symbol. [0088]: the modulated portion of the packet have a decreased or increased rate).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the first data coded with a first MCS and second data coded with a second MCS, as taught by Sundman, to be modulated in multiple and different tones in a given OFDM symbol, as taught by Taghavi Nasrabadi.
Doing so provides the ability to transfer more data using the same amount of communication resources, i.e., time segments, frequency ranges, etc. (Taghavi Nasrabadi: [0088]).
Regarding claim(s) 9, Sundman in view of Wang discloses all features of claim(s) 1 as outlined above.
Sundman discloses wherein the plurality of link adaptation test portions includes a first portion and a second portion of the first packet (Fig. 4, [0031]: the TRX 130 sends 1.1 to the second TRX 140 a link adaptation frame, LAF, comprising first data coded with a first MCS and second data coded with a second MCS)
Chou does not disclose, but Taghavi Nasrabadi discloses the first portion and the second portion being modulated in different orthogonal frequency division multiplexed (OFDM) symbols associated with the first packet (Fig. 7, [0085], [0087]: different portions of a packet are repeated in the time domain. The packet is modulated with a modulation scheme defining the rate of big transmission per symbol. For example, symbols are transmitted with different rates. [0081] and Fig. 8, [0086]: the symbols are OFDM symbols, i.e., a time segment 804 is referred to as OFDM symbol).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the first data coded with a first MCS and second data coded with a second MCS, as taught by Sundman, to be modulated with different modulation schemes in different OFDM symbols, as taught by Taghavi Nasrabadi.
Doing so boosts SNR, i.e., if symbols of different rates are transmitted at the same power level, the higher the modulation rate, the lower the SNR is with respect to portions of the packets received as the power is divided among the bits sent in the symbol (Taghavi Nasrabadi: [0087]).
Regarding claim(s) 10, Sundman in view of Wang and Taghavi Nasrabadi discloses all features of claim(s) 9 as outlined above.
Sundman does not disclose, but Taghavi Nasrabadi discloses wherein the first packet includes a series of OFDM symbols (Fig. 7, [0085], [0087]: the packet is repeated in the time domain and includes multiple portions. Fig. 8, [0086]: the time domain includes time segments 804, also referred to as OFDM symbols), each OFDM symbol being modulated using a different transmission rate option of the plurality of transmission rate options ([0087]: symbols of different rates are transmitted based on modulation schemes defining the rate of bit transmission per symbol. [0088]: the modulated portion of the packet have a decreased or an increased rate).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the first data coded with a first MCS and second data coded with a second MCS, as taught by Sundman, to be modulated with different modulation schemes, i.e., rates, in different OFDM symbols, as taught by Taghavi Nasrabadi.
Doing so boosts SNR, i.e., if symbols of different rates are transmitted at the same power level, the higher the modulation rate, the lower the SNR is with respect to portions of the packets received as the power is divided among the bits sent in the symbol (Taghavi Nasrabadi: [0087]).
Claim(s) 15 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sundman et al. (US 2019/0115999 A1) in view of Wang et al. (US 2019/0260497 A1) and Sakoda et al. (US 2005/0089005 A1).
Regarding claim(s) 15, Sundman in view of Wang discloses all features of claim(s) 1 as outlined above.
Sundman does not disclose, but Sakoda discloses wherein:
the first packet is a request to send (RTS) packet (Fig. 5, [0194]: MSDU is multiplexed with RTS information to create a data+RTS frame including RTS SMH. [0210], table 5: the RTS SMH includes an RTS attribute field indicating a rate strategy. [0213], [0237]: the rate strategy is associated with transmission rate modes);
to receive the feedback information, the one or more processors are individually or collectively further operable to execute the code to cause the first wireless device to receive a clear to send (CTS) message in response to the RTS packet ([0235]: CTS is transmitted in response to the reception of the RTS, wherein the CTS includes a transmission rate); and
the CTS message includes a field populated with the feedback information (Fig. 5, [0225]-[0226], [0229], [0235]: CTS+ACK frame includes a rate field in the CTS SMH to indicate the transmission rate of data transmitted in response to the transmission of CTS is placed).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the LAF, as taught by Sundman, to be multiplexed with RTS information to create a data-RTS frame triggering a CTS message upon reception of the data-RTS frame, wherein the CTS frame includes a transmission rate in a rate field, as taught by Sakoda.
Doing so allows the CTS transmitting station to measure the quality of the RTS receive signal, determine and notify a transmission rate at which it can receive data (Sakoda: abstract); and thus, providing an excelling wireless communication system (Sakoda: [0073]).
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, 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 extension fee 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 date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to THE HY NGUYEN whose telephone number is (571)270-3813. The examiner can normally be reached on Mo-Fr: 8am-4pm.
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, Joseph Avellino, can be reached on (571) 272-3905. 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.
/THE HY NGUYEN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2478
TheHy.Nguyen@USPTO.gov