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 .
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statements (IDS) filed on 12/28/2023 has been considered. However, the publications in the IDSs consist of a length technical document:
Document 1:
“IEEE Standard for Information Technology-Telecommunications and Information Exchange
between Systems Local and Metropolitan Area Networks-Specific Requirements, Part 11: Wireless LAN Medium Access Control (MAC) and Physical Layer (PHY) Specifications, IEEE Computer Society, IEEE Std 802.11TM-2020 (Revision of IEEE Std 802.11-2016), Approved 3 December 2020, 4379 pages”
The above document is enormous, and Examiner could not determine relevant information
contained therein with regard to the claimed invention.
Applicants' cooperation in indicating relevant sections in the above documents, if it is believed
to be pertinent to the claimed invention, is necessary in order to determine the subject matter sought to be patented, and clarify any differences, modification or improvement that are assumingly made in light of any relevant content included in the IDS documents leading to the claimed subject matter.
The information disclosure statement filed on 1/21/2025 fails to comply with 37 CFR 1.98(a)(2), which requires a legible copy of each cited foreign patent document; each non-patent literature publication or that portion which caused it to be listed; and all other information or that portion which caused it to be listed. It has been placed in the application file, but the information referred to therein has not been considered.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 101
35 U.S.C. 101 reads as follows:
Whoever invents or discovers any new and useful process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter, or any new and useful improvement thereof, may obtain a patent therefor, subject to the conditions and requirements of this title.
Claims 1-17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to non-statutory subject matter. The claim(s) does/do not fall within at least one of the four categories of patent eligible subject matter.
Regarding claim 1, the preamble recites an "apparatus comprising logic and circuitry configured
to cause a wireless communication Station (STA) to".
However, an apparatus (i.e. Machine) is defined as a concrete thing, consisting of parts, or of
certain devices and combination of devices. Burr V. Duryee, 68 U.S. 531, 570, 17 L. Ed. 650 (1863). This includes every mechanical device or combination of mechanical powers and devices to perform some function and produce a certain effect or result. Corning V. Burden, 56 U.S. 252, 267, 14 L. Ed. 683 (1854) (MPEP 2106.03).
In claim 1, there is no apparent parts and related functions. It is the wireless communication
Station (STA) that perform the function(s).
Claims 2-17 are rejected due to their dependency on claim 1.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 1-17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Regarding claim 1, claim 1 recites the following:
“An apparatus comprising logic and circuitry configured to cause a wireless communication
Station (STA) to:
determine …; and
transmit …“.
The above claim is directed to an apparatus, however the body of the claim does not specify any structural elements parts or devices that define the apparatus in one hand, in the other hand there is no express recitation of any function of the apparatus in the claim. The functions that are recited in the claim are functions of the wireless communication stations.
Dependent claims 2-17 are subject to at least the same rejections with regard to respective independent claim 1.
Regarding claim 16, claim 16 recites the limitation that “the apparatus comprising a radio”. However, the parent claim 1 is directed to the same Apparatus comprising circuitry configured to cause a wireless communication station… It is not clear if the elements recited in claim 16 are part of the circuitry, or the wireless communication station. Thus the meaning of claim 16 is vague and indefinite.
Regarding claim 17, claim 17 recites the limitation that “the apparatus comprising one or more antennas connected to the radio, and a processor …”. However, the parent claim 1 is directed to the same Apparatus comprising circuitry configured to cause a wireless communication station… It is not clear if the elements recited in claim 17 are part of the circuitry, or the wireless communication station. Thus the meaning of claim 17 is vague and indefinite.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 18-20 are allowed.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: the closest prior arts of record is US 9172495 B1 (hereinafter Shah).
Shah teaches A method for dynamic modulation change while generating a Media Access
Control (MAC) Protocol Data Unit (PDU) in a Long Term Evolution (LTE) protocol wireless network. The method comprising: receiving a Channel Quality Indicator (CQI) in an evolved Node-B (eNB) from a User Equipment (UE), wherein the CQI is associated with a modulation scheme and coding rate; determining whether padding is needed in the MAC PDU; and if padding is needed, the eNB selecting a slower modulation scheme and coding rate than the associated modulation scheme and coding rate specified by the CQI, wherein the selected slower modulation scheme and coding rate are selected so as to eliminate padding in the MAC PDU, and transmitting the MAC PDU using the selected slower modulation scheme and coding rate.
However, the prior arts of record, in single or combination, does not teach, suggest or provide
rational for, in view of the interconnected relationships among all the limitations within the same claim,
“identify a Medium Access Control (MAC)Protocol Data Unit (MPDU) of a Physical layer (PHY) Protocol Data Unit (PPDU) based on a first count of MAC padding bits to pad the MPDU according to a first setting of one or more rate- dependent parameters and a minimal MPDU size requirement, wherein the first setting of the one or more rate-dependent parameters is based on a condition of a wireless communication channel for transmission of the PPDU;
determine a second setting of the one or more rate-dependent parameters, different from the first setting of the one or more rate-dependent parameters, such that a second count of MAC padding bits to pad the MPDU according to the second setting of the one or more rate-dependent parameters is less than the first count of MAC padding bits; and
transmit the PPDU according to a transmission data rate based on the second setting of the one or more rate-dependent parameters.” of claim 18.
Consequently, all dependent claims from claim(s) 18 is/are also allowed.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Gao et al. US 20160142232 A1 Enhancing modulation and coding scheme selection and medium
access control (mac) protocol data unit aggregation using mac efficiency information.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to David Z Sun whose telephone number is (571)270-0750. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 0800am-0500pm.
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, Moo Jeong can be reached at 571-272-9617. 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.
/D.Z.S./Examiner, Art Unit 2418
/Moo Jeong/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2418
