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 .
This action is in response to the application filed on 11/10/2023.
The IDSs filed on 12/11/2025, 01/14/2025 and 2/17/2026 have been considered.
Claims 1-30 have been examined and rejected.
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.
Claim(s) 1-7, 12-13, 19-20 and 29-30 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Asterjadhi (US 20210006361 A1, from IDS) in view of Kim (US 20210044389 A1).
Regarding Claim 1, Asterjadhi discloses an apparatus for wireless communication, comprising: at least one memory comprising computer-executable instructions; and one or more processors configured to execute the computer-executable instructions and cause the apparatus to:
obtain, at a first wireless node, information indicating transmission, from a second wireless node, of a physical layer (PHY) protocol data unit (PPDU) intended for the first wireless node (Examiners Note: Using BRI consistent with the specification, FIG. 2, the claimed “apparatus” in the preamble belongs to the first/second wireless node. Based on this interpretation, see FIG. 2, paras 179-180, the first WLAN device may provide a PPDU (such as a HARQ PPDU) to the second WLAN device … a HARQ process begins with a first HARQ transmission from the first WLAN device to the second WLAN device. The first HARQ transmission (sometimes referred to as an initial transmission) may be the initial PPDU or packet in the HARQ exchange for a particular TXOP (transmission opportunity). The first HARQ transmission may include a HARQ indicator (such as a bit, field, or sub-field in a PHY header) to indicate that the transmission is a HARQ transmission);
generate a frame indicating negative acknowledgment of at least a portion of the PPDU if one or more conditions are met (see para 179, the second WLAN device may determine that the one or more MPDUs of the PPDU were not successfully received and decoded/i.e., condition met. Even when the reception of all the MPDUs fails, the PHY header may be received successfully by the second WLAN device).
output the frame to the second wireless node (see para 179, The second WLAN device may use the information included in the PHY header of the PPDU (such as the TX AID, RX AID, Acknowledgment policy, PPDU duration, MCS, NSS, etc.) to generate a negative (N) ACK (N-ACK) for an ARQ protocol).
Asterjadhi does not teach “generate a frame indicating negative acknowledgement”.
In the same field of endeavor, Kim teaches this limitation: see paras 215-216, When an HARQ PPDU including HARQ data is received, a receiving terminal may transmit an HARQ feedback frame including a sequence related to an ACK/NACK. The HARQ feedback frame may include sequence X related to an ACK or sequence Y related to an NACK.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the generation of ACK/NACK in Asterjadhi, so as to include ACK/NACK in a frame generated for feedback as taught Kim, the motivation being performance improvement for indoor and outdoor environment (see Kim, para 3), and also a method for efficiently using a channel having a wide bandwidth in a WLAN system (see Kim, para 37).
Regarding Claim 2, Asterjadhi discloses the apparatus of claim 1, wherein at least one of the one or more conditions is considered met only if the first wireless node fails to decode a Physical layer convergence protocol (PLCP) Service Data Unit (PSDU) of the PPDU (see para 144, A physical convergence layer (PHY) protocol data unit (PPDU) may contain one or more PHY service data units (PSDUs), each of which addressed to one or more STAs. Each PSDU may contain an MPDU or one or more MPDUs in the form of an Aggregated MPDU (A-MPDU). A PPDU also may be referred to as a packet in some aspects of this disclosure. In some implementations, a PPDU may contain an MPDU or an A-MPDU that is addressed to a receiver).
Regarding Claim 3, Asterjadhi discloses the apparatus of claim 1, wherein the information is obtained from at least one of: a physical (PHY) header of the PPDU (see FIG. 2, paras 179-180, The first HARQ transmission may include a HARQ indicator (such as a bit, field, or sub-field in a PHY header) to indicate that the transmission is a HARQ transmission); or
Regarding Claim 4, Asterjadhi discloses the apparatus of claim 3, wherein the information comprises at least one of: a basic service set (BSS) color value; a value of a flag indicating a direction type of the PPDU; a receiver identifier; or a transmitter identifier (see para 172, the first WLAN device may generate and send a HARQ PPDU that includes the addressing information in the PHY header. The first WLAN device may translate the receiver address (RA) and transmitter address (TA) contained in the MAC header of MPDUs contained in the PPDU into a receiver association identifier (RX AID), a transmitter association identifier (TX AID), and include the RX AID, TX AID, and a BSS color in the PHY header of the HARQ PPDU).
Regarding Claim 5, Asterjadhi discloses the apparatus of claim 4, wherein at least one of the receiver identifier or the transmitter identifier comprises a medium access control (MAC) address, an association identifier, or an identifier that is derived from the MAC address or the association identifier (see para 173, The RA (receiver address) and the TA (transmitter address) may be MAC addresses having 48 bits, and MAC addresses typically do not result in collision issues since MAC addresses are expected to be unique).
Regarding Claim 6, Asterjadhi discloses the apparatus of claim 4, wherein at least one of the one or more conditions is considered met if the BSS color value indicates the first wireless node and second wireless node belong to the same BSS or multiple BSSID set (Examiners Note: Using BRI consistent with the specification, the above limitation has been interpreted to mean “if the addressing information in the HARQ PPDU has the association identifier and BSS color are the same (not unique), the HARQ PPDU is considered to have collision, and to avoid the collision it is encoded or randomized”. Based on this interpretation, see para 172, the first WLAN device may generate and send a HARQ PPDU that includes the addressing information in the PHY header… Encoding or randomizing the addressing information may further reduce the probability of collisions, since the AIDs and BSS Color are not unique/i.e., the first wireless node and second wireless node belong to the same BSS belong to the same BSS color. The second WLAN device may know how the encoded or randomized address information was generated, such as based on a encoding or randomization scheme defined in the HARQ protocol, or based on an information exchange with the first WLAN device. Therefore, the second WLAN device may be able to decode and retrieve the addressing information (such as the TX AID) from the PHY header).
Regarding Claim 7, Asterjadhi discloses the apparatus of claim 4, wherein at least one of one or more conditions is considered met if: the value of the flag indicates an uplink direction if the first wireless node is an access point (AP); and the transmitter identifier indicates the second wireless node is associated with the AP (see para 23, the addressing information may include one or more of a receiver identifier, a transmitter identifier, Basic Service Set (BSS) color, and uplink flag; and at para 172, the first WLAN device 110 may hash the TX AID with a compressed BSSID to generate an encoded or randomized addressing information (or pseudo-addressing information) for the PHY header. The compressed BSSID may be formed from a portion of the BSSID (such as multiple of the upper or lower bits of the BSSID). In some implementations, the compressed BSSID may be obtained as a function of the BSSID, and may be equal to a 32-bit CRC calculated over the BSSID contained in Beacon frames transmitted by the AP (such as the first WLAN device 110) which is generating the HARQ PPDU, or by the AP to which the second WLAN device 120 is associated to (where the second WLAN device 120 is generating the HARQ PPDU)).
Regarding Claim 12, Asterjadhi discloses the apparatus of claim 1, wherein the frame comprises a block acknowledgment (BA) frame (see FIG. 15, para 223, HARQ BA request (H-BAR) trigger frame),
Regarding Claim 13, Asterjadhi discloses the apparatus of claim 12, wherein the BA frame has a BA information field set to a value that indicates a negative acknowledgment of the PPDU (see para 145, In another retransmission protocol, the receiving STA may bundle ACKs or NACKs for multiple MPDUs in a block acknowledgment feedback message, where each MPDU can be sent in separate frames or as an A-MPDU in a single frame).
Regarding Claim 19, Asterjadhi discloses the apparatus of claim 1, wherein the frame includes a duration field that indicates a duration that is based on: a duration indicated in a transmit opportunity (TXOP) field in a physical (PHY) header of the PPDU; a duration of a short interframe space (SIFS); and a duration of the frame (see para 21, providing signaling from a PHY layer of the first WLAN device to a media access control (MAC) layer of the first WLAN device indicating the timing information of the HARQ transmissions within the HARQ TXOP.)).
Regarding Claim 20, Asterjadhi discloses the apparatus of claim 1, further comprising at least one transceiver configured to receive the information and transmit the frame, wherein the apparatus is configured as a wireless station (see FIG. 1. para 159, The APs and STAs function and communicate (via the respective communication links) according to the IEEE 802.11 family of standards).
Regarding Claim 29, Asterjadhi discloses the apparatus of claim 1, further comprising at least one transceiver configured to transmit the PPDU and receive the frame, wherein the apparatus is configured as a wireless station (see FIG. 1. para 159, The APs and STAs function and communicate (via the respective communication links) according to the IEEE 802.11 family of standards).
Regarding Claim 30, Asterjadhi discloses a method for wireless communications
at a first wireless node, obtaining information indicating transmission, from a second wireless node, of a physical layer (PHY) protocol data unit (PPDU) intended for the first wireless node (see FIG. 2, paras 179-180, the first WLAN device may provide a PPDU (such as a HARQ PPDU) to the second WLAN device … a HARQ process begins with a first HARQ transmission from the first WLAN device to the second WLAN device. The first HARQ transmission (sometimes referred to as an initial transmission) may be the initial PPDU or packet in the HARQ exchange for a particular TXOP (transmission opportunity). The first HARQ transmission may include a HARQ indicator (such as a bit, field, or sub-field in a PHY header) to indicate that the transmission is a HARQ transmission);
generating a frame indicating negative acknowledgment of at least a portion of the PPDU if one or more conditions are met (see para 179, the second WLAN device may determine that the one or more MPDUs of the PPDU were not successfully received and decoded/i.e., condition met. Even when the reception of all the MPDUs fails, the PHY header may be received successfully by the second WLAN device); and
outputting the frame to the second wireless node (see para 179, The second WLAN device may use the information included in the PHY header of the PPDU (such as the TX AID, RX AID, Acknowledgment policy, PPDU duration, MCS, NSS, etc.) to generate a negative (N) ACK (N-ACK) for an ARQ protocol).
Asterjadhi does not teach “generate a frame indicating negative acknowledgement”.
In the same field of endeavor, Kim teaches this limitation: see paras 215-216, When an HARQ PPDU including HARQ data is received, a receiving terminal may transmit an HARQ feedback frame including a sequence related to an ACK/NACK. The HARQ feedback frame may include sequence X related to an ACK or sequence Y related to an NACK.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the generation of ACK/NACK, so as to include ACK/NACK in a frame generated for feedback as taught Kim, the motivation being performance improvement for indoor and outdoor environment (see Kim, para 3), and also a method for efficiently using a channel having a wide bandwidth in a WLAN system (see Kim, para 37).
Claim(s) 8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Asterjadhi in view of Kim, in view of Lu (US 20250203591 A1).
Regarding Claim 8, Asterjadhi in view of Kim do not disclose details regarding: at least one of the one or more conditions is considered met if: the value of the flag indicates a downlink direction if the first wireless node is a station (STA) or a peer-to-peer direction if the first wireless node is a STA; and the receiver identifier indicates the PPDU is intended for the STA.
In the same field of endeavor, Lu teaches this limitation: see paras 354-364, Tables 4-5, A format of the PPDU transmission information in Table 4 may be defined as shown in Table 5: flag for uplink/downlink/P2P transmission subfield: in a case where the value is “10”, it indicates the downlink transmission, that is, the PPDU transmission is transmitted from an AP to a non-AP STA; in a case where the value is “11”, it indicates the P2P transmission, that is, the PPDU transmission is transmitted from a non-AP STA to another non-AP STA; the value of “00” is reserved … receiver AID subfield: indicating the AID of the PPDU receiver; … the report message frame for reporting the first monitoring or receiving condition information is a radio measurement report frame.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the combined systems of Asterjadhi and Kim, so as to include a flag to indicate a downlink direction if the first wireless node is a station (STA) or a peer-to-peer direction if the first wireless node is a STA and the receiver identifier indicates the PPDU is intended for the STA as taught Lu, the motivation being to overcome the transmission delay under the restricted target wake time (TWT) operation (see Lu, para 3), by monitoring or receiving condition information to reduce signal interference to the first STA device caused by the transmission of the first target station of the second BSS, which includes TWT (see Lu, para 287).
Claim(s) 9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Asterjadhi in view of Kim, in view of Lee (US 20210099256 A1).
Regarding Claim 9, Asterjadhi in view of Kim do not disclose details regarding: at least one of the one or more conditions is considered met only if the first wireless node decodes at least a portion of a physical (PHY) header of the PPDU.
In the same field of endeavor, Lee teaches this limitation: see para 154, a HARQ PPDU supporting a HARQ operation can be composed of multiple codewords at the PHY layer. In the initial transmission of a HARQ PPDU, the intended receiving device of the PPDU may fail to interpret some codewords at the PHY layer. The receiving device will send a response packet to the sender with information about the codewords that failed to be successfully received/decoded. The transmitting device will respond with the failed codewords.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the combined systems of Asterjadhi and Kim, so as to include a decoding failure condition when a part of the PHY header is decoded as taught Lee, the motivation being, combine the existing codewords stored in the soft combining buffer and the codewords received via retransmission (see Lee, para 154).
Claim(s) 10-11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Asterjadhi in view of Kim, in view of Lee, further in view of Di Taranto (US 20250081237 A1).
Regarding Claim 10, Asterjadhi in view of Kim, in view of Lee do not disclose details regarding: the at least one of the one or more conditions is considered met if the PPDU indicates a response is expected via: a bit in the PHY header of the PPDU; or a value of a transmit opportunity (TXOP) field in the PHY header.
In the same field of endeavor, Di Taranto teaches this limitation: see para 35, FIG. 3. in step 302, receiving at least a preamble or a physical layer (PHY) header of a frame. The preamble or the physical layer (PHY) header includes an indication, such as for example a field, sub-field or bit, that one or more STAs should reduce or avoid causing interference during the transmission of the frame or for a duration of a transmit opportunity (TXOP) during which the frame is transmitted. Here, receiving may be for example decoding at least part of the preamble or PHY header to identify the indication and to identify whether or not the indication indicates that the STA should reduce or avoid causing interference.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the combined systems of Asterjadhi, Kim and Lee, so that the PPDU indicates a response for a decoding failure condition using a bit in the PHY as taught Di Taranto, so that one or more STAs should reduce or avoid causing interference during the transmission of the frame or for a duration of a transmit opportunity (TXOP) during which the frame is transmitted (see Di Taranto, para 35).
Regarding Claim 11, Asterjadhi in view of Kim do not disclose details regarding: the PPDU indicates the response is expected at, in, or during a short interframe space (SIFS) after an end of the PPDU.
In the same field of endeavor, Lee teaches this limitation: see para 125, FIG. 19. STA1 and STA2 are continuously exchanging data and corresponding acknowledgement (ACK) and negative ACK (NACK) frames to indicate successful or unsuccessful receipt of previous MPDUs in PPDUs. In particular, as shown in scenario 1 of FIG. 19, STA1 performs a backoff procedure to gain control of a shared channel. Thereafter, STA1 transmits MPDU1 to STA2 via PPDU1. After a SIFS period, STA transmits an ACK/NACK frame to indicate that MPDU1 was not successfully received.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the combined systems of Asterjadhi and Kim, so that after SIFS period the receiving STS transmits ACK/NACK indicating that MPDU was not successfully received as taught Lee, so as to prevents transmissions from other terminals interrupting the backoff transmission after a transmission failure by continually transmitting messages between stations (see Lee, para 125).
Claim(s) 14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Asterjadhi in view of Kim, in view of Atefi (US 20210235486 A1).
Regarding Claim 14, Asterjadhi in view of Kim do not disclose details regarding: the BA frame has at least one of: at least one association ID (AID) traffic ID (TID) information field set to a value that indicates a negative acknowledgment of the PPDU; or
In the same field of endeavor, Atefi teaches: see para 192, a frame/packet may be a MAC service data unit (MSDU), a physical layer service data unit (PSDU), PPDU, and/or various other types of frames/packets. In some configurations, data/frames/packets associated with and/or corresponding to multiple (e.g., two or more different) (e.g., a plurality of) access categories, stream IDs, traffic categories, and/or traffic IDs may be included in a single MSDU/PSDU/PPDU and/or a single ACK/NACK/BA communicated between AP and one or more STA(s) during DL and/or UL communication.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the combined systems of Asterjadhi and Kim, so that a block ack (BA) communicated between an AP and STA has stream or traffic IDs as taught Atefi, so as to enable relatively faster download and/or upload of information, relatively less latency, and/or relatively less power consumption, which may provide various technical benefits and may improve the overall user experience (see Atefi, Background).
Claim(s) 15-18, 21, 24-25, 27-28 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Asterjadhi in view of Kim, in view of Ryu (US 20240147531 A1).
Regarding Claim 15, Asterjadhi in view of Kim do not disclose details regarding: the trigger frame: comprises a basic trigger frame or a multi-user (MU) request to send (RTS) trigger frame; and includes a set of transmit parameters for the second wireless node to use when retransmitting MAC Protocol Data Units (MPDUs) that were contained in the PPDU and a duration time within which retransmitted PPDUs should be sent.
In the same field of endeavor, Ryu teaches: see para 33, FIG. 1. A Multi User Request to Send (MU-RTS) triggered TXOP sharing (TXS) frame sent by the tSTA (transmit station) to reserve the TXOP for both hops, and a portion of the TXOP is shared with the rSTA (relay station). The rSTA and/or the dSTA (destination station) may transmit a Clear to Send (CTS) message or frame, in response to the MU-RTS TXS frame. The tSTA transmits a Physical layer Protocol Data Unit (PPDU) PPDU-1 to the rSTA. For example, in the MU-RTS TXS frame, the tSTA reserves a 5 millisecond (ms) TXOP, out of which 3 ms is allocated to the rSTA, and the tSTA uses 2 ms for PPDU-1transmission. The rSTA can perform data forwarding by decoding and forwarding. As indicated by the dashed lines, the transmission of BA from the rSTA back to the tSTA may be either skipped or performed if an end-to-end BA agreement is set up. The relay processing delay (T RELAY) is either pre-defined for any relays (e.g., being equal to Short Interframe Spacing (SIFS)), or per-determined by the rSTA. The rSTA forwards or retransmits successfully received MPDUs carried in PPDU-1 in a Physical layer Protocol Data Unit (PPDU) PPDU-2 to the dSTA.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the combined systems of Asterjadhi and Kim, so that a multi user request to send trigger frame includes retransmission of MPDUs during a TXOP as taught Ryu, for increased data signaling loads over longer wireless communication distances while balancing requirements for overhead, processing, and timings costs (see Ryu, para 3).
Regarding Claim 16, Asterjadhi in view of Kim do not disclose details regarding: the trigger frame is designed to trigger transmissions from one or more other wireless devices along with the first wireless node.
In the same field of endeavor, Ryu teaches: see para 33, FIG. 1. A Multi User Request to Send (MU-RTS) triggered TXOP sharing (TXS) frame sent by the tSTA (transmit station) to reserve the TXOP for both hops, and a portion of the TXOP is shared with the rSTA (relay station). The rSTA and/or the dSTA (destination station) may transmit a Clear to Send (CTS) message or frame, in response to the MU-RTS TXS frame. The tSTA transmits a Physical layer Protocol Data Unit (PPDU) PPDU-1 to the rSTA.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the combined systems of Asterjadhi and Kim, so that a multi user trigger frame (RTS) is used to address multiple wireless devices as taught Ryu, for increased data signaling loads over longer wireless communication distances while balancing requirements for overhead, processing, and timings costs (see Ryu, para 3).
Regarding Claim 17, Asterjadhi in view of Kim do not disclose details regarding: the frame includes a set of transmit parameters for the second wireless node to use when retransmitting MAC Protocol Data Units (MPDUs) that were contained in the PPDU.
In the same field of endeavor, Ryu teaches: see para 33, The rSTA forwards or retransmits successfully received MPDUs carried in PPDU-1 in a Physical layer Protocol Data Unit (PPDU) PPDU-2 to the dSTA. The dSTA sends an acknowledgement frame (e.g., Ack, BA, or M-BA) back to the rSTA, which may forward the received acknowledgement frame with another acknowledgement frame (e.g., M-BA) back to the tSTA. The Modulation and Coding Scheme (MCS)/number of spatial streams (NSS) for the PPDU-2 may be informed to the rSTA with the information embedded in PPDU-1 or in a separate management frame/i.e., representing the transmit parameters.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the combined systems of Asterjadhi and Kim, to use appropriate transmit parameters as taught Ryu, so as to reach remote clients that cannot be reached due to inappropriate transmit parameters such as high MCS, NSS or with lowest MCS (see Ryu, para 33).
Regarding Claims 18, 28, Asterjadhi in view of Kim do not disclose details regarding: the transmit parameters include at least one of: a modulation and coding scheme (MCS), a number of spatial streams (NSS),
In the same field of endeavor, Ryu teaches: see para 33, The rSTA forwards or retransmits successfully received MPDUs carried in PPDU-1 in a Physical layer Protocol Data Unit (PPDU) PPDU-2 to the dSTA. The dSTA sends an acknowledgement frame (e.g., Ack, BA, or M-BA) back to the rSTA, which may forward the received acknowledgement frame with another acknowledgement frame (e.g., M-BA) back to the tSTA. The Modulation and Coding Scheme (MCS)/number of spatial streams (NSS) for the PPDU-2 may be informed to the rSTA with the information embedded in PPDU-1 or in a separate management frame/i.e., representing the transmit parameters.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the combined systems of Asterjadhi and Kim, to use appropriate transmit parameters as taught Ryu, so as to reach remote clients that cannot be reached due to inappropriate transmit parameters such as high MCS, NSS or with lowest MCS (see Ryu, para 33).
Regarding Claim 21, Asterjadhi discloses an apparatus for wireless communication, comprising: at least one memory comprising computer-executable instructions; and one or more processors configured to execute the computer-executable instructions and cause the apparatus to:
output, at a second wireless node, a physical layer (PHY) protocol data unit (PPDU) intended for a first wireless node (Examiners Note: Using BRI consistent with the specification, FIG. 2, the claimed “apparatus” in the preamble belongs to the first/second wireless node. Based on this interpretation, see FIG. 2, paras 179-180, the first WLAN device may provide a PPDU (such as a HARQ PPDU) to the second WLAN device … a HARQ process begins with a first HARQ transmission from the first WLAN device to the second WLAN device. The first HARQ transmission (sometimes referred to as an initial transmission) may be the initial PPDU or packet in the HARQ exchange for a particular TXOP (transmission opportunity). The first HARQ transmission may include a HARQ indicator (such as a bit, field, or sub-field in a PHY header) to indicate that the transmission is a HARQ transmission);
obtain a frame indicating negative acknowledgment of at least a portion of the PPDU if one or more conditions are met (see para 179, the second WLAN device may determine that the one or more MPDUs of the PPDU were not successfully received and decoded/i.e., condition met. Even when the reception of all the MPDUs fails, the PHY header may be received successfully by the second WLAN device); and
Asterjadhi does not teach “generate a frame indicating negative acknowledgement”.
In the same field of endeavor, Kim teaches this limitation: see paras 215-216, When an HARQ PPDU including HARQ data is received, a receiving terminal may transmit an HARQ feedback frame including a sequence related to an ACK/NACK. The HARQ feedback frame may include sequence X related to an ACK or sequence Y related to an NACK.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the generation of ACK/NACK, so as to include ACK/NACK in a frame generated for feedback as taught Kim, the motivation being performance improvement for indoor and outdoor environment (see Kim, para 3), and also a method for efficiently using a channel having a wide bandwidth in a WLAN system (see Kim, para 37).
Asterjadhi in view of Kim do not disclose details regarding: output, for re-transmission, one or more MAC Protocol Data Units (MPDUs) that were contained in the PPDU, after obtaining the frame
In the same field of endeavor, Ryu teaches: see para 33, FIG. 1. A Multi User Request to Send (MU-RTS) triggered TXOP sharing (TXS) frame sent by the tSTA (transmit station) to reserve the TXOP for both hops, and a portion of the TXOP is shared with the rSTA (relay station). The rSTA and/or the dSTA (destination station) may transmit a Clear to Send (CTS) message or frame, in response to the MU-RTS TXS frame. The tSTA transmits a Physical layer Protocol Data Unit (PPDU) PPDU-1 to the rSTA. For example, in the MU-RTS TXS frame, the tSTA reserves a 5 millisecond (ms) TXOP, out of which 3 ms is allocated to the rSTA, and the tSTA uses 2 ms for PPDU-1transmission. The rSTA can perform data forwarding by decoding and forwarding. As indicated by the dashed lines, the transmission of BA from the rSTA back to the tSTA may be either skipped or performed if an end-to-end BA agreement is set up. The relay processing delay (T RELAY) is either pre-defined for any relays (e.g., being equal to Short Interframe Spacing (SIFS)), or per-determined by the rSTA. The rSTA forwards or retransmits successfully received MPDUs carried in PPDU-1 in a Physical layer Protocol Data Unit (PPDU) PPDU-2 to the dSTA.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the combined systems of Asterjadhi and Kim, so that a multi user request to send trigger frame includes retransmission of MPDUs during a TXOP as taught Ryu, for increased data signaling loads over longer wireless communication distances while balancing requirements for overhead, processing, and timings costs (see Ryu, para 3).
Regarding Claim 24, Asterjadhi discloses the apparatus of claim 21, wherein the frame comprises a block acknowledgment (BA) frame, a trigger frame (see FIG. 15, para 223, HARQ BA request (H-BAR) trigger frame), or
Regarding Claim 25, Asterjadhi discloses the apparatus of claim 24, wherein the BA frame has a BA information field set to a value that indicates a negative acknowledgment of the PPDU (see para 145, In another retransmission protocol, the receiving STA may bundle ACKs or NACKs for multiple MPDUs in a block acknowledgment feedback message, where each MPDU can be sent in separate frames or as an A-MPDU in a single frame).
Regarding Claim 27, Asterjadhi discloses the apparatus of claim 21, wherein: the frame includes a set of transmit parameters for the second wireless node to use when retransmitting one or more MAC Protocol Data Units (MPDUs) that were contained in the PPDU; and the one or more MPDUs are outputted for retransmission using at least some of the transmit parameters.
In the same field of endeavor, Ryu teaches: see para 33, FIG. 1. A Multi User Request to Send (MU-RTS) triggered TXOP sharing (TXS) frame sent by the tSTA (transmit station) to reserve the TXOP for both hops, and a portion of the TXOP is shared with the rSTA (relay station). The rSTA and/or the dSTA (destination station) may transmit a Clear to Send (CTS) message or frame, in response to the MU-RTS TXS frame. The tSTA transmits a Physical layer Protocol Data Unit (PPDU) PPDU-1 to the rSTA. For example, in the MU-RTS TXS frame, the tSTA reserves a 5 millisecond (ms) TXOP, out of which 3 ms is allocated to the rSTA, and the tSTA uses 2 ms for PPDU-1transmission. The rSTA can perform data forwarding by decoding and forwarding. As indicated by the dashed lines, the transmission of BA from the rSTA back to the tSTA may be either skipped or performed if an end-to-end BA agreement is set up. The relay processing delay (T RELAY) is either pre-defined for any relays (e.g., being equal to Short Interframe Spacing (SIFS)), or per-determined by the rSTA. The rSTA forwards or retransmits successfully received MPDUs carried in PPDU-1 in a Physical layer Protocol Data Unit (PPDU) PPDU-2 to the dSTA.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the combined systems of Asterjadhi and Kim, so that a multi user request to send trigger frame includes retransmission of MPDUs during a TXOP as taught Ryu, for increased data signaling loads over longer wireless communication distances while balancing requirements for overhead, processing, and timings costs (see Ryu, para 3).
Claim(s) 22-23 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Asterjadhi in view of Kim, in view of Ryu, further in view of Di Taranto.
Regarding Claim 22, Asterjadhi in view of Kim, in view of Ryu do not disclose details regarding: the PPDU indicates a response is expected, wherein the indication comprises: a bit in the PHY header of the PPDU; or a value of a transmit opportunity (TXOP) field in the PHY header.
In the same field of endeavor, Di Taranto teaches this limitation: see para 35, FIG. 3. in step 302, receiving at least a preamble or a physical layer (PHY) header of a frame. The preamble or the physical layer (PHY) header includes an indication, such as for example a field, sub-field or bit, that one or more STAs should reduce or avoid causing interference during the transmission of the frame or for a duration of a transmit opportunity (TXOP) during which the frame is transmitted. Here, receiving may be for example decoding at least part of the preamble or PHY header to identify the indication and to identify whether or not the indication indicates that the STA should reduce or avoid causing interference.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the combined systems of Asterjadhi, Kim and Ryu, so that the PPDU indicates a response for a decoding failure condition using a bit in the PHY as taught Di Taranto, so that one or more STAs should reduce or avoid causing interference during the transmission of the frame or for a duration of a transmit opportunity (TXOP) during which the frame is transmitted (see Di Taranto, para 35).
Regarding Claim 23, Asterjadhi in view of Kim, in view of Ryu do not disclose details regarding: the PPDU indicates the response is expected at, in, or during a short interframe space (SIFS) after an end of the PPDU.
In the same field of endeavor, Lee teaches this limitation: see para 125, FIG. 19. STA1 and STA2 are continuously exchanging data and corresponding acknowledgement (ACK) and negative ACK (NACK) frames to indicate successful or unsuccessful receipt of previous MPDUs in PPDUs. In particular, as shown in scenario 1 of FIG. 19, STA1 performs a backoff procedure to gain control of a shared channel. Thereafter, STA1 transmits MPDU1 to STA2 via PPDU1. After a SIFS period, STA transmits an ACK/NACK frame to indicate that MPDU1 was not successfully received.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the combined systems of Asterjadhi and Kim, so that after SIFS period the receiving STS transmits ACK/NACK indicating that MPDU was not successfully received as taught Lee, so as to prevents transmissions from other terminals interrupting the backoff transmission after a transmission failure by continually transmitting messages between stations (see Lee, para 125).
Claim(s) 26 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Asterjadhi in view of Kim, in view of Ryu further in view of Atefi (US 20210235486 A1).
Regarding Claim 26, Asterjadhi in view of Kim in view of Ryu do not disclose details regarding: the BA frame has at least one of: at least one association ID (AID) traffic ID (TID) information field set to a value that indicates a negative acknowledgment of the PPDU; or
In the same field of endeavor, Atefi teaches: see para 192, a frame/packet may be a MAC service data unit (MSDU), a physical layer service data unit (PSDU), PPDU, and/or various other types of frames/packets. In some configurations, data/frames/packets associated with and/or corresponding to multiple (e.g., two or more different) (e.g., a plurality of) access categories, stream IDs, traffic categories, and/or traffic IDs may be included in a single MSDU/PSDU/PPDU and/or a single ACK/NACK/BA communicated between AP and one or more STA(s) during DL and/or UL communication.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the combined systems of Asterjadhi, Kim and Ryu, so that a block ack (BA) communicated between an AP and STA has stream or traffic IDs as taught Atefi, so as to enable relatively faster download and/or upload of information, relatively less latency, and/or relatively less power consumption, which may provide various technical benefits and may improve the overall user experience (see Atefi, Background).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to DEEPA BELUR whose telephone number is (571)270-3722. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8 am - 4:30 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, Kevin Bates can be reached at 571-272-3980. 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.
/DEEPA BELUR/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2472