DETAILED ACTION
1. This office action is a response to the Application/Control Number: 18/531,174 filed on
12/06/2023.
Claims Status
2. This office action is based upon claims received on 12/06/2023, which replace all prior or other submitted versions of the claims.
- Claims 1-20 are pending.
- Claims 1-19 are rejected.
- Claim 20 is objected.
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
3. The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Priority
4. Applicant’s claim for the benefit of a prior-filed application under 35 U.S.C. 119(e) or under 35 U.S.C. 120, 121, 365(c), or 386(c) is acknowledged.
Acknowledgment is made of a continuation of Prior Application Number 17410916 filed 2021/08/24.
Information Disclosure Statement
5. The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 12/06/2023 is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
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, 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.
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.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the
examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the
effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised
of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that
was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner
to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art
against the later invention.
7. Claims 1, 2, 4-8, 18, 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sampath et al (US 9271192 B1) in view of HOMCHAUDHURI et al (US 20210250117 A1) i.e. “HOMCHAUDHURI”.
Regarding Claim 1. Sampath teaches: A device (Sampath - FIG. 1 & FIG. 2 & Col 2 (ln 47, 64) […]a wireless transceiver 102 with a rate adaptation module 104 […] a schematic of a transceiver ; NOTE-DISCLOSURE & TEACHING: per Col 2 (ln 47) a wireless transceiver 102 reads on: A device)
comprising: a transceiver comprising a wireless transmitter (Sampath FIG. 1 & FIG. 2 & Col 2 (ln 65) […] transceiver may have a transmit section 202 and a receive section 204; NOTE-DISCLOSURE & TEACHING: per Col 2 (ln 65) […] transceiver may have a transmit section 202 reads on: comprising: a transceiver comprising a wireless transmitter ); and a processor configured (Sampath Col 5 (ln41-42 … retry processor 510 may start at state 0. If the retry counter returns a retry count of zero, i.e., the packet is transmitted successfully without retry; NOTE-DISCLOSURE & TEACHING: computational device with processing processor is well known in prior art (Also see HOMCHAUDHURI combined herein FIG. 6 Processor 612; FIG. 7 Processor 712) such as such retry processor reads on: a processor configured )
to: transmit, using a first setting of the wireless transmitter, a first probe packet during a first access period on a wireless channel(Sampath - Col 3 (ln 66-67), Col 4 (ln 1-14) [….] Packets (e.g., A, B, C, D) may be queued in a software portion 212 of the transmit section, and copies of a packet to be sent (e.g., A(1), A(2), . . . ) may be queued in a hardware portion 214 of the transmit section. A packet may need to be resent, or “retried”, until an acknowledgment (ACK) signal signifying a successful transmission of the packet is received from the receiving client. A retry counter 216 may be incremented on each retry of a packet to be sent, and the retry counter value provided to the rate adaptation module 104. In an embodiment, the hardware section can be designed so that successive “retried” packets (e.g., A(1), A(2), . . . ) are sent at progressively lower rates until a “successful” transmission. The retry counter 216 may be incremented on each retry of a packet to be sent, and the retry counter value provided to the rate adaptation module 104; Col 4 (ln 40-45) let the data rate as predicted by the rate adaptation algorithm be 54 Mbps (2nd row of the table). If this packet is retried, the first transmission occurs at 54 Mbps, the next transmission occurs at 48 Mbps, the next at 36 Mbps, and so on until the packet is successfully transmitted; NOTE-DISCLOSURE & TEACHING: per - Col 3 (ln 67), Col 4 (ln 1-14) i.e. the hardware section can be designed so that successive “retried” packets (e.g., A(1), A(2), . . . ) are sent and per Col 4 (ln 40-45) i.e. , the first transmission occurs at 54 Mbps reads on: to: transmit, and furthermore per Col 3 (ln 67), Col 4 (ln 1-14) i.e. successive “retried” packets (e.g., A(1), A(2), . . . ) are sent at progressively lower rates and per Col 4 (ln 40-45) i.e. the first transmission occurs at 54 Mbps reads on: using a first setting of the wireless transmitter , and furthermore per Col 3 (ln 67), Col 4 (ln 1-14) i.e. successive “retried” packets (e.g., A(1) are sent and per Col 4 (ln 40-45) i.e. the first transmission reads on: a first probe packet, and furthermore per Col 3 (ln 67), Col 4 (ln 1-14) i.e. successive “retried” packets (e.g., A(1), A(2), . . . ) are sent […] i.e. until a “successful” transmission and per Col 4 (ln 40-45) i.e. first transmission occurs at 54 Mbps, the next transmission occurs at 48 Mbps, the next at 36 Mbps, and so on i.e. until the packet is successfully transmitted reads on: during a first access period, and per Col 3 (ln 67), Col 4 (ln 1-14) i.e. successive “retried” packets (e.g., A(1), A(2), . . . ) are i.e. sent reads on: on a wireless channel )
during the first access period, wait for a first reply period to determine a first result responsive to the first probe packet (Sampath Col 3 (ln 67), Col 4 (ln 1-14) See above, Col 4 (ln 1-14) see above; NOTE-DISCLOSURE & TEACHING: per Col 3 (ln 67), Col 4 (ln 1-14) i.e. successive “retried” packets (e.g., A(1), A(2), . . . ) are sent […] i.e. until a “successful” transmission and per Col 4 (ln 40-45) i.e. first transmission occurs at 54 Mbps, the next transmission occurs at 48 Mbps, the next at 36 Mbps, and so on i.e. until the packet is successfully transmitted reads on: during the first access period, where per Col 3 (ln 67), Col 4 (ln 1-14) i.e. A packet may need to be resent, or “retried”, until an acknowledgment (ACK) signal signifying a successful transmission of the packet is received from the receiving client reads on: wait for a first reply period to determine a first result responsive to the first probe packet ),
cause the wireless transmitter to transition to a second setting based on the first result (Sampath Col 3 (ln 67), Col 4 (ln 1-14) See above, Col 4 (ln 1-14) see above; NOTE-DISCLOSURE & TEACHING: per Col 3 (ln 67), Col 4 (ln 1-14) i.e. successive “retried” packets (e.g., A(1), A(2), . . . ) are sent at progressively lower rates and per Col 4 (ln 40-45) i.e. the first transmission occurs at 54 Mbps, i.e. the next transmission occurs at 48 Mbps reads on: cause the wireless transmitter to transition to a second setting , where per Col 3 (ln 67), Col 4 (ln 1-14) i.e. until a “successful” transmission and per Col 4 (ln 40-45) i.e. the next transmission occurs at 48 Mbps, the next at 36 Mbps, and so on i.e. until the packet is successfully transmitted i.e. continue retransmitting A(2) 48 Mbps if no ACK is received for A(1) at 58 Mbps reads on: based on the first result),
transmit, using the second setting of the wireless transmitter, a second probe packet during the first access period on the wireless channel (Sampath Col 3 (ln 67), Col 4 (ln 1-14) See above, Col 4 (ln 1-14) see above; NOTE-DISCLOSURE & TEACHING: per - Col 3 (ln 67), Col 4 (ln 1-14) i.e. the hardware section can be designed so that successive “retried” packets (e.g., A(1), A(2), . . . ) are sent and per Col 4 (ln 40-45) i.e. , the next transmission occurs at 48 Mbps reads on: to: transmit, and furthermore per Col 3 (ln 67), Col 4 (ln 1-14) i.e. successive “retried” packets (e.g., A(1), A(2), . . . ) are sent at progressively lower rates and per Col 4 (ln 40-45) i.e. the next transmission occurs at 48 Mbps reads on: using the second setting of the wireless transmitter , and furthermore per Col 3 (ln 67), Col 4 (ln 1-14) i.e. successive “retried” packets (e.g., A(2) are sent and per Col 4 (ln 40-45) i.e. the next transmission occurs reads on: a second probe packet, and furthermore per Col 3 (ln 67), Col 4 (ln 1-14) i.e. successive “retried” packets (e.g., A(1), A(2), . . . ) are sent […] i.e. until a “successful” transmission and per Col 4 (ln 40-45) i.e. first transmission occurs at 54 Mbps, the next transmission occurs at 48 Mbps, the next at 36 Mbps, and so on i.e. until the packet is successfully transmitted i.e. time retransmitting until an ACK is received reads on: during the first access period, and per Col 3 (ln 67), Col 4 (ln 1-14) i.e. successive “retried” packets (e.g., A(2), . . . ) are i.e. sent and per Col 4 (ln 40-45) i.e. the next transmission occurs reads on: on the wireless channel ),
wait for a second reply period to determine a second result responsive to the second probe packet (Sampath Col 3 (ln 67), Col 4 (ln 1-14) See above, Col 4 (ln 1-14) see above; NOTE-DISCLOSURE & TEACHING: per Col 3 (ln 67), Col 4 (ln 1-14) i.e. A packet may need to be resent, or “retried”, until an acknowledgment (ACK) signal signifying a successful transmission of the packet is received from the receiving client and per Col 4 (ln 1-14) i.e. the next transmission occurs at 48 Mbps, the next at 36 Mbps, and so on i.e. until the packet is successfully transmitted i.e. time retransmitting until an ACK is received reads on: wait for a first reply period to determine second result responsive to the second probe packet i.e. similar to the A(1) if not response of ACK is received, wait for ACK after A(2) is sent at 48 Mbps),
and after determining the second result, transmit, using a first data packet setting of the wireless transmitter that is based on the second result, a first data packet (Sampath – Col1 (ln 22-29) […] In the IEEE 802.11 family of specifications, a wireless device initiates transmission at the highest possible data rate. If the wireless device receives an acknowledgement (ACK) from a receiving device, it is assumed that the wireless environment can support the highest data rate and further transmissions occur with this (highest) date rate. Otherwise the data rate is lowered in a step-wise fashion until an ACK is obtained ;Col 3 (ln 67), Col 4 (ln 1-14) See above, Col 4 (ln 1-14) see above; NOTE-DISCLOSURE & TEACHING: per Col 3 (ln 67), Col 4 (ln 1-14) i.e. A packet may need to be resent, or “retried”, until an acknowledgment (ACK) signal signifying a successful transmission of the packet is received from the receiving client and per Col 4 (ln 1-14) i.e. the next transmission occurs at 48 Mbps, the next at 36 Mbps, and so on i.e. until the packet is successfully transmitted and therefore i.e. time retransmitting until an ACK is received as it pertains to i.e. the next transmission occurs at 48 Mbps where if ACK is received before next transmission reads on: and after determining the second result i.e. similar to the A(1) if not response of ACK is received, wait for ACK after A(2) is sent at 48 Mbps. Furthermore per Col1 (ln 22-29) i.e. further transmissions occur with this (highest) date rate. Otherwise the data rate is lowered in a step-wise fashion until an ACK is obtained i.e. further transmissions occur at data lowered in a step-wise fashion as an option i.e. reads on: transmit, using a first data packet setting of the wireless transmitter , where i.e. Otherwise the data rate is lowered in a step-wise fashion until an ACK is obtained and per Col 4 (ln 1-14) i.e. the next transmission occurs at 48 Mbps, […] and so on i.e. until the packet is successfully transmitted reads on: that is based on the second result i.e. in a scenario where an ACK is received after 48 Mbps setting apply data rate to and further transmissions occur per 802.11. Furthermore per Col1 (ln 22-29) i.e. further transmissions occur reads on: a first data packet ).
While Sampath per Col1 (ln 22-29) i.e. applying further transmissions occur with this (highest) date rate. Otherwise the data rate is lowered in a step-wise fashion until an ACK is obtained appears to teach transmit, using a first data packet setting of the wireless transmitter that is based on the second result to therefore transmit a first data packet, assuming arguendo such as teaching is implied, and therefore,
Sampath does not appear to explicitly teach or strongly suggest (i.e. implies – see italicized portions): transmit, using a first data packet setting of the wireless transmitter that is based on the second result, a first data packet;
HOMCHAUDHURI teaches: after determining the second result, transmit, using a first data packet setting of the wireless transmitter that is based on the second result, a first data packet (HOMCHAUDHURI - ¶0027 […] at regular intervals of time, rate adaptation may probe at a data rate greater than the maximum rate previously used in order to determine whether a higher PHY rate may be sustained in the channel; ¶0040 […] During retry attempts, a probe frame included data rates within a Rate-Max window, to ensure monotonicity. The Rate-Max is not changed in the middle of the retries so, in some implementations, data rates higher than the current failing data rate may be used. For example, assuming a current transmission data rate having the MCS of 7 2×2 and the Rate-Max is at an MCS of 9 2×2. If the MCS of 7 2×2 suffers a predetermined number (e.g., 3) of consecutive failures (i.e., no block-Ack received in response), the rate adaptation algorithm may select an MCS of 9 and an MCS of 8 for the next consecutive retransmissions.; ¶0043 […] a second loop, geared towards the retry of a packet, converges rapidly towards a more reliable rate in a monotonic manner. The second loop may optimize a cost function of air time vs. transmission power. The second loop may also progressively reduce the Rate-Max such that the packet retries are sent based on timing (e.g., sent out quickly) and reliability and not necessarily based on highest throughput. For example, if a congestion level of a medium is “low,” a retry packet may be sent at the lowest MCS such that the retry packet is more reliable from a link-margin standpoint and such that the lowered congestion prevents collision; ¶0066 the STA may progressively reduce the Rate-Max such that the packet retries are sent based on timing (i.e., sent out fast) and reliability and not necessarily based on highest throughput. For example, at block 215, the STA may optionally select an MCS value, from a plurality of MCS values, having a lowest value to reduce the maximum rate for the rate search; NOTE-DISCLOSURE & TEACHING: per ¶0027 i.e. at regular intervals of time, rate adaptation may probe at a data rate and ¶0040 i.e. During retry attempts, a probe frame included data rates within a Rate-Max window which also reads on: transmit, a first probe packet ; per ¶0027 i.e. at regular intervals and per ¶0040 i.e. During retry attempts reads on: transmit, a second probe packet , per ¶0040 i.e. If the MCS of 7 2×2 suffers a predetermined number (e.g., 3) of consecutive failures (i.e., no block-Ack received in response) i.e. as applied to retry and consecutive failures reads on: determine a second result responsive to the second probe packet i.e. for any of the Retry attempts.
Furthermore per FIG. 2 step retry option & ¶0066 i.e. STA may progressively reduce the Rate-Max reads on: after determining the second result i.e. set before the retry for a retry packet at 205. Furthermore per ¶0066 i.e. such that the packet retries are sent reads on: transmit , where per ¶0066 i.e. progressively reduce the Rate-Max such as per ¶0066 & ¶0043 select an MCS value, from a plurality of MCS values, having a lowest value reads on: using a first data packet setting of the wireless transmitter ¶0066 i.e. progressively reduce the Rate-Max reads on: that is based on the second result i.e. a retry packet includes a second packet or retry after a first. per ¶0066 i.e. the packet retries are sent based on timing (i.e., sent out fast) and reliability reads on: a first data packet i.e. the second loop converges to the lowest rate to insure subsequent retries are quickly and reliably sent i.e. to ensure sending of data, as opposed to targeting a maximum rate);
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the teachings of Sampath with teachings of HOMCHAUDHURI, since HOMCHAUDHURI enables procedures to progressively reduce the Rate-Max such that the packet retries are sent based on timing (i.e., sent out fast) and reliability (HOMCHAUDHURI - ¶0043; ¶0066).
Regarding Claim 2. Sampath in view of HOMCHAUDHURI teaches: The device of claim 1,
Furthermore Sampath teaches: wherein the processor is configured to transmit the first data packet in a second access period (Sampath – FIG. 2& Col 3 (ln 66-67), Col 4 (ln 1-14) See claim 1; NOTE-DISCLOSURE & TEACHING: per Col 3 (ln 66-67), Col 4 (ln 1-14) i.e. Packets (e.g., A, B, C, D) may be queued in a software portion 212 of the transmit section, and copies of a packet to be sent (e.g., A(1), A(2), . . . ) may be queued in a hardware portion 214 of the transmit section i.e. after successful transmission of A in hardware queue, packet B is next in queue for transmitting on the hardware side reads on: wherein the processor is configured to transmit the first data packet , and subject to the same process applied to packet A i.e. per Col 4 (ln 40-45) i.e. first transmission occurs at 54 Mbps, the next transmission occurs at 48 Mbps, the next at 36 Mbps, and so on i.e. until the packet is successfully transmitted i.e. time retransmitting until an ACK is received for packet B reads on: in a second access period ).
Regarding Claim 4. Sampath in view of HOMCHAUDHURI teaches: The device of claim 1,
furthermore HOMCHAUDHURI teaches: wherein the first setting of the wireless transmitter is associated with a first throughput, and wherein the second setting of the wireless transmitter is associated with a second throughput higher than the first throughput when the processor receives, during the first reply period, a reply packet to the first probe packet (HOMCHAUDHURI - ¶0040 see claim 1; NOTE-DISCLOSURE & TEACHING: per ¶0040 […]in some implementations, data rates higher than the current failing data rate may be used. For example, assuming a current transmission data rate having the MCS of 7 2×2 reads on: wherein the first setting of the wireless transmitter is associated with a first throughput and the Rate-Max is at an MCS of 9 2×2. Furthermore per ¶0040 If the MCS of 7 2×2 suffers a predetermined number (e.g., 3) of consecutive failures (i.e., no block-Ack received in response), the rate adaptation algorithm may select an MCS of 9 and an MCS of 8 for the next consecutive retransmissions reads on: and wherein the second setting of the wireless transmitter is associated with a second throughput i.e. data rates higher than the current failing data rate reads on: higher than the first throughput , where per ¶0040 i.e. If the MCS of 7 2×2 suffers a predetermined number (e.g., 3) of consecutive failures (i.e., no block-Ack received in response reads on: when the processor receives, during the first reply period, a reply packet to the first probe packet where i.e. During retry attempts, a probe frame included data rates within a Rate-Max window ).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the teachings of Sampath in view of HOMCHAUDHUR, further with the teachings of HOMCHAUDHURI, since HOMCHAUDHURI enables procedures to progressively reduce the Rate-Max such that the packet retries are sent based on timing (i.e., sent out fast) and reliability (HOMCHAUDHURI - ¶0043; ¶0066).
Regarding Claim 5. Sampath in view of HOMCHAUDHURI teaches: The device of claim 1,
furthermore Sampath teaches: wherein the first setting of the wireless transmitter is associated with a first throughput, and wherein the second setting of the wireless transmitter is associated with a second throughput lower than the first throughput when the processor fails to receive, during the first reply period, a reply packet to the first probe packet (Sampath - Col 4 (ln 40-45) See claim 1; NOTE-DISCLOSURE & TEACHING: per Col 4 (ln 40-45) i.e. first transmission occurs at 54 Mbps reads on: wherein the first setting of the wireless transmitter is associated with a first throughput, the next transmission occurs at 48 Mbps reads on: and wherein the second setting of the wireless transmitter is associated with a second throughput lower than the first throughput , […] and so on i.e. until the packet is successfully transmitted i.e. time retransmitting until an ACK is received i.e. when no ACK is received for 58 Mbps reads on: when the processor fails to receive, during the first reply period, a reply packet to the first probe packet).
Regarding Claim 6. Sampath in view of HOMCHAUDHURI teaches: The device of claim 1,
furthermore HOMCHAUDHURI teaches: wherein the first setting of the wireless transmitter is associated with a first power consumption, and wherein the second setting of the wireless transmitter is associated with a second power consumption lower than the first power consumption when the processor receives, during the first reply period, a reply packet to the first probe packet (HOMCHAUDHURI - ¶0032 For purposes of this application an Ack, block-Ack, or negative-Ack (Nack or NACK) may be use interchangeable unless specifically indicated otherwise; ¶0040 See claim 1; ¶0066 See claim 1; NOTE-DISCLOSURE & TEACHING: per ¶0043 i.e. The second loop may optimize a cost function of air time vs. transmission power. The second loop may also progressively reduce the Rate-Max reads on: wherein the first setting of the wireless transmitter is associated with a first power consumption such that i.e. the packet retries are sent based on timing (e.g., sent out quickly) such as a retry packet may be sent at the lowest MCS such that the retry packet is more reliable from a link-margin standpoint reads on: and wherein the second setting of the wireless transmitter is associated with a second power consumption lower than the first power consumption i.e. less time and more reliability i.e. less power consumption, as opposed to on highest throughput. Furthermore per FIG. 2 step retry option & ¶0066 i.e. STA may progressively reduce the Rate-Max based upon a retry such as per ¶0040 no block-Ack received in response and per ¶0032 i.e. an Ack, block-Ack, or negative-Ack (Nack or NACK) may be use interchangeable i.e. no block ack can be a NACK reads on: when the processor receives, during the first reply period, a reply packet to the first probe packet i.e. no response while retrying is equivalent to receiving, during the first reply period, a reply packet to the first probe packet such as NACK response. A concept well known in prior art see Raissinia et al (US 20180048450 A1) ¶0046 “STA 115-a switches from using a non-extended range transmission mode to using an extended range transmission mode (e.g., after receipt of a probe response from an AP, when sending a control response frame (such as an ACK, or a negative ACK (NACK or NAK)), etc.)” where “sending a control response frame” such as “a negative ACK (NACK or NAK)” could be applied to no block-Ack received).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the teachings of Sampath in view of HOMCHAUDHUR, further with the teachings of HOMCHAUDHURI, since HOMCHAUDHURI enables procedures to progressively reduce the Rate-Max such that the packet retries are sent based on timing (i.e., sent out fast) and reliability (HOMCHAUDHURI - ¶0043; ¶0066).
Regarding Claim 7. Sampath in view of HOMCHAUDHURI teaches: The device of claim 1,
furthermore HOMCHAUDHURI teaches: wherein the first setting of the wireless transmitter is associated with a first power consumption, and wherein the second setting of the wireless transmitter is associated with a second power consumption lower than the first power consumption when the processor fails to receive, during the first reply period, a reply packet to the first probe packet (HOMCHAUDHURI - ¶0040 See claim 1; ¶0066 See claim 1; NOTE-DISCLOSURE & TEACHING: per ¶0043 i.e. The second loop may optimize a cost function of air time vs. transmission power. The second loop may also progressively reduce the Rate-Max reads on: wherein the first setting of the wireless transmitter is associated with a first power consumption such that i.e. the packet retries are sent based on timing (e.g., sent out quickly) such as a retry packet may be sent at the lowest MCS such that the retry packet is more reliable from a link-margin standpoint reads on: and wherein the second setting of the wireless transmitter is associated with a second power consumption lower than the first power consumption i.e. less time and more reliability i.e. less power consumption, as opposed to on highest throughput. Furthermore per FIG. 2 step retry option & ¶0066 i.e. STA may progressively reduce the Rate-Max based upon a retry such as per ¶0040 no block-Ack received in response reads on: when the processor fails to receive, during the first reply period, a reply packet to the first probe packet).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the teachings of Sampath in view of HOMCHAUDHUR, further with the teachings of HOMCHAUDHURI, since HOMCHAUDHURI enables procedures to progressively reduce the Rate-Max such that the packet retries are sent based on timing (i.e., sent out fast) and reliability (HOMCHAUDHURI - ¶0043; ¶0066).
Regarding Claim 8. Sampath in view of HOMCHAUDHURI teaches: The device of claim 1,
furthermore Sampath teaches: wherein the second setting is based on a content of a reply received during the first reply period (Sampath Col 3 (ln 67), Col 4 (ln 1-14) See claim1; NOTE-DISCLOSURE & TEACHING: per Col 3 (ln 67), Col 4 (ln 1-14) i.e. until a “successful” transmission and per Col 4 (ln 40-45) i.e. the next transmission occurs at 48 Mbps reads on: wherein the second setting , the next at 36 Mbps, and so on i.e. until the packet is successfully transmitted i.e. continue retransmitting A(2) 48 Mbps if no ACK is received for A(1) at 58 Mbps reads on: is based on a content of a reply received during the first reply period);
Sampath does not appear to explicitly teach or strongly suggest (i.e. implies – see italicized portions): a reply packet;
furthermore HOMCHAUDHURI teaches: wherein the second setting is based on a content of a reply packet received during the first reply period (HOMCHAUDHURI - ¶0032 See claim 1; ¶0040 See claim 1; ¶0066 See claim 1; NOTE-DISCLOSURE & TEACHING: Furthermore per FIG. 2 step retry option & ¶0066 i.e. STA may progressively reduce the Rate-Max based upon a retry reads on: wherein the second setting such as per ¶0040 no block-Ack received in response and per ¶0032 i.e. an Ack, block-Ack, or negative-Ack (Nack or NACK) may be use interchangeable i.e. no block ack can be a NACK reads on: is based on a content of a reply packet received i.e. no response while retrying is equivalent to receiving, during the first reply period, a reply packet to the first probe packet such as NACK response. A concept well known in prior art).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the teachings of Sampath in view of HOMCHAUDHUR, further with the teachings of HOMCHAUDHURI, since HOMCHAUDHURI enables procedures to progressively reduce the Rate-Max such that the packet retries are sent based on timing (i.e., sent out fast) and reliability (HOMCHAUDHURI - ¶0043; ¶0066).
Regarding Claim 18. Sampath in view of HOMCHAUDHURI teaches: The device of claim 1,
Furthermore Sampath teaches: wherein the wireless channel is a wireless channel according to an IEEE 802.11 protocol (Sampath FIG. 1 & FIG. 2 & Col 2 (ln 44-46) […] a wireless Local Area Network (WLAN) that complies with one of the IEEE 802.11 family of specifications; NOTE-DISCLOSURE & TEACHING: per Col 2 (ln 47) a wireless transceiver 102 with a rate adaptation module 104 in per Col 2 (ln 44-46) a wireless Local Area Network (WLAN) that complies with one of the IEEE 802.11 family of specifications reads on: wherein the wireless channel is a wireless channel according to an IEEE 802.11 protocol ).
Regarding Claim 19. Sampath in view of HOMCHAUDHURI teaches: The device of claim 1,
Furthermore Sampath teaches: further comprising an antenna coupled to the transceiver (Sampath FIG. 2 & Col 3 (ln 12-13) received packets, i.e., those packets received at the antenna 205, where FIG. depicts 205 coupled to TXRF TX BB and RX RF RX BB; NOTE-DISCLOSURE & TEACHING: i.e. the antenna 205, where FIG. depicts 205 coupled to TXRF TX BB and RX RF RX BB reads on: further comprising an antenna coupled to the transceiver ).
8. Claims 3, 11, 12, 15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sampath in view of HOMCHAUDHURI, further in view of Provisioning QoS in Wi-Fi Systems With Asymmetric Full-Duplex Communications Mohammed Hirzallah , Student Member, IEEE, Wessam Afifi , and Marwan Krunz, Fellow, IEEE - IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON COGNITIVE COMMUNICATIONS AND NETWORKING, VOL. 4, NO. 4, DECEMBER 2018, i.e. “IEEE”.
Regarding Claim 3. Sampath in view of HOMCHAUDHURI teaches: The device of claim 1,
furthermore HOMCHAUDHURI teaches: wherein the processor is configured to transmit the first data packet (HOMCHAUDHURI - ¶0040 See claim 1; ¶0043 See claim 1; ¶0066 the STA may progressively reduce the Rate-Max such that the packet retries are sent based on See claim 1; NOTE-DISCLOSURE & TEACHING: Per FIG. 2 step retry option & ¶0066 i.e. STA may progressively reduce the Rate-Max reads on: after determining the second result i.e. set before the retry for a retry packet at 205. Furthermore per ¶0066 i.e. such that the packet retries are sent reads on: transmit , where per ¶0066 i.e. progressively reduce the Rate-Max such as per ¶0066 & ¶0043 select an MCS value, from a plurality of MCS values, having a lowest value and per ¶0066 i.e. progressively reduce the Rate-Max i.e. a retry packet includes a second packet or retry after a first. per ¶0066 i.e. the packet retries are sent based on timing (i.e., sent out fast) and reliability reads on: a first data packet i.e. the second loop converges to the lowest rate to insure subsequent retries are quickly and reliably sent as opposed to targeting a maximum rate).
Sampath in view of HOMCHAUDHURI does not appear to explicitly teach or strongly suggest (Note – see italicized portions): transmit the first data packet in the first access period
IEEE teaches: wherein the processor is configured to transmit the first data packet in the first access period (IEEE FIG. 5
PNG
media_image1.png
447
879
media_image1.png
Greyscale
& Page 947 right col (ln 9-18) […] B. Data Transfer….After establishing an AFD-enabled BA session, the originator (STA-U) contends for the medium […] sending a new dual purpose frame called ‘delayed CTS to uplink station - RTS to downlink station’ (dCTSU-RTSD)…. Delayed CTS is required to update STA-U that it should wait for another CTS before starting data transmission ( ln 22-23) AP replies with a CTS to STA-U, and continues with the HD mode (i.e., UL-only) ln (30-32)…. receiving UL frames from STA-U; NOTE-DISCLOSURE & TEACHING: Subsequent to receiving CTS from AP, STA-U starts UL QOS Data MPDU transmission i.e. STA-U receiver transmits QOS Data MPDU frames i.e. frame with setting changed from a control type to a data frame type reads on: wherein the processor is configured to transmit the first data packet, where FIG. 5 depicts RTS, CTSU, rRTS, and UL QOS Data MPDU transmission in the same TXOP1 reads on: in the first access period ).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the teachings of Sampath in view of HOMCHAUDHURI with teachings of IEEE, since IEEE enables an adaptation scheme which relies on intelligent and cognitive approaches to improve Wi-Fi networks awareness about channel dynamics as well as inter-node and self-interference (IEEE - Abstract).
Regarding Claim 11. Sampath in view of HOMCHAUDHURI teaches: The device of claim 1,
Sampath in view of HOMCHAUDHURI does not appear to explicitly teach or strongly suggest (Note – see italicized portions): wherein the first access period is a contention-free channel access period, the processor configured to obtain the contention-free channel access period.
IEEE teaches: wherein the first access period is a contention-free channel access period, the processor configured to obtain the contention-free channel access period (IEEE – FIG. 5 & Page 942 left col., Abstract…asymmetric full-duplex (AFD) communications in WLANs; Page 942 right col (ln 17-23)….an AP can operate in an asymmetric full duplex (AFD) fashion, whereby it can transmit downlink (DL) frames to a STA while simultaneously receiving uplink (UL)frames on the same channel from another STA; Page 945 left col., (ln 7) …Once UL station or AP have successfully contended using EDCA UL and DL station pair start exchanging frames with the AP; Page 946 (ln 1-3)…an uplink station that gains the TXOP by contending for the channel.. ; Page 947 right col (ln 9-10) B. Data Transfer….After establishing an AFD-enabled BA session, the originator (STA-U) contends for the medium; NOTE-DISCLOSURE & TEACHING: STA- U gains access to TXOP 1 in Fig. 5 i.e. obtains access to a subsequent TXOP 1 WIFI reads on: wherein the first access period is a contention-free channel access period , where communication is furthermore AFD i.e. no conflict between AP, STA-U, STA-D, and i.e. an uplink station that gains the TXOP reads on: the processor configured to obtain the contention-free channel access period ).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the teachings of Sampath in view of HOMCHAUDHURI with teachings of IEEE, since IEEE enables an adaptation scheme which relies on intelligent and cognitive approaches to improve Wi-Fi networks awareness about channel dynamics as well as inter-node and self-interference (IEEE - Abstract).
Regarding 12. Sampath in view of HOMCHAUDHURI and IEEE teaches: The device of claim 11,
Furthermore IEEE teaches: wherein the processor is configured to obtain the contention-free channel access period using an Enhanced Distributed Channel Access (EDCA) protocol (IEEE – FIG. 5 & Page 942 left col., …; Page 945 left col., (ln 7) …Once UL station or AP have successfully contended using EDCA UL and DL station pair start exchanging frames with the AP; Page 946 (ln 1-3)…an uplink station that gains the TXOP by contending for the channel.. ; Page 947 right col (ln 9-10) B. Data Transfer….After establishing an AFD-enabled BA session, the originator (STA-U) contends for the medium; NOTE-DISCLOSURE & TEACHING: i.e. STA- U gains access to TXOP 1 in Fig. 5 i.e. reads on: wherein the processor is configured to obtain the contention-free channel access period. Furthermore per Page 945 left col., (ln 7) …Once UL station or AP have successfully contended using EDCA reads on: using an Enhanced Distributed Channel Access (EDCA) protocol ).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the teachings of Sampath in view of HOMCHAUDHURI with teachings of IEEE, since IEEE enables an adaptation scheme which relies on intelligent and cognitive approaches to improve Wi-Fi networks awareness about channel dynamics as well as inter-node and self-interference (IEEE - Abstract).
Regarding Claim 15. Sampath in view of HOMCHAUDHURI teaches: The device of claim 1,
Sampath in view of HOMCHAUDHURI does not appear to explicitly teach or strongly suggest (Note – see italicized portions): the first access period is a Quality of Service (QoS) Transmission Opportunity (TXOP);
IEEE teaches: wherein the first access period is a Quality of Service (QoS) Transmission Opportunity (TXOP) (IEEE FIG. 5 & Page 947 right col (ln 9-18) ( ln 22-23) See claim 11; NOTE-DISCLOSURE & TEACHING: …STA-U starts UL QOS Data MPDU transmission i.e. STA-U receiver transmits QOS Data MPDU frames i.e. frame with setting changed from a control type to a data frame type within the same TXOP i.e. the first contention free period TXOP 1 that is a TXOP for QOS transmissions reads on: wherein the first access period is a Quality of Service (QoS) Transmission Opportunity (TXOP) ).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the teachings of Sampath in view of HOMCHAUDHURI with teachings of IEEE, since IEEE enables an adaptation scheme which relies on intelligent and cognitive approaches to improve Wi-Fi networks awareness about channel dynamics as well as inter-node and self-interference (IEEE - Abstract).
9. Claims 9, 10, 16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sampath in view of HOMCHAUDHURI, further in view of Gao et al (US 20120140647 A1), i.e. “Gao”.
Regarding Claim 9. Sampath in view of HOMCHAUDHURI teaches: The device of claim 1,
furthermore HOMCHAUDHURI teaches: wherein the processor is configured to receive a reply packet during the first reply period (HOMCHAUDHURI - ¶0032 See claim 1; ¶0040 See claim 1; ¶0066 See claim 1; NOTE-DISCLOSURE & TEACHING: Furthermore per FIG. 2 step retry option & ¶0066 i.e. STA may progressively reduce the Rate-Max based upon a retry and ¶0040 no block-Ack received in response per ¶0032 i.e. an Ack, block-Ack, or negative-Ack (Nack or NACK) may be use interchangeable i.e. no block ack can be a NACK reads on: wherein the processor is configured to receive a reply packet during the first reply period i.e. no response while retrying is equivalent to receiving, during the first reply period, a reply packet to the first probe packet such as NACK response. A concept well known in prior art).
Sampath in view of HOMCHAUDHURI does not appear to explicitly teach or strongly suggest (Note – see italicized portions): wherein the reply packet includes a Hybrid Coordination Function (HCF) Black acknowledgement (ACK) packet, a Multi-Traffic Identifier (Multi-TID) ACK packet, or a Clear to Send (CTS) packet
Gao teaches: wherein the processor is configured to receive a reply packet during the first reply period (Gao FIG. 9 & ¶0035 […] employ probing packets to detect burst noise. For instance, the probing packets may detect whether there is currently a "burst interference on period" (also referred to as an "on period") or a "burst interference off period" (also referred to as a "off period" […] probe packet data rate should be chosen such that the successful transmission of the probe packet indicates a high probability of successful transmission of the data packet; ¶00041 […] Examples of probing packets include (but are not limited to) ready-to-send (RTS) packets and dedicated probing packets. In turn, the source device may wait for response(s) to these probing packet(s) from the destination device. Such responses may include (but are not limited to) clear-to-send (CTS) packets; NOTE-DISCLOSURE & TEACHING: per ¶0041 probing packets include (but are not limited to) ready-to-send (RTS) packets and dedicated probing packets and i.e. responses may include (but are not limited to) clear-to-send (CTS) packets such as FIG. 9 CTS 920 reads on: wherein the processor is configured to receive a reply packet . Furthermore per ¶0035 "off period" FIG. 9 Noise off period reads on: during the first reply period ),
and wherein the reply packet includes a Hybrid Coordination Function (HCF) Black acknowledgement (ACK) packet(note: limitations separated by a recitation “or” are interpreted as presented in the alternative and not required together i.e. for the purposes of patentable weight), a Multi-Traffic Identifier (Multi-TID) ACK packet (note: limitations separated by a recitation “or” are interpreted as presented in the alternative and not required together i.e. for the purposes of patentable weight),
or(note: limitations separated by a recitation “or” are interpreted as presented in the alternative and not required together i.e. for the purposes of patentable weight)
a Clear to Send (CTS) packet (Gao FIG. 9 & ¶0041 See above; NOTE-DISCLOSURE & TEACHING: per FIG. 9 CTS 920 and per ¶0041 i.e. responses may include (but are not limited to) clear-to-send (CTS) packets reads on: and wherein the reply packet includes a Clear to Send (CTS) packet ).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the teachings of Sampath in view of HOMCHAUDHUR, with teachings of Gao, since Gao enables procedure which advantageously increases the chance of error free communications in a bursty noise environment (Gao - ¶0021).
Regarding Claim 10. Sampath in view of HOMCHAUDHURI teaches: The device of claim 1,
Sampath in view of HOMCHAUDHURI does not appear to explicitly teach or strongly suggest (Note – see italicized portions): to transmit a second data packet using a second data packet setting of the wireless transmitter during a second access period that occurs prior to the first access period, wherein the first setting of the wireless transmitter are equal to the second data packet setting of the wireless transmitter;
Gao teaches: wherein the processor is configure to transmit a second data packet using a second data packet setting of the wireless transmitter during a second access period that occurs prior to the first access period, wherein the first setting of the wireless transmitter are equal to the second data packet setting of the wireless transmitter (Gao FIG. 9 & ¶0035 See claim 9 ; ¶0066 […] RTS packet 918 is sent during a noise off period 907. Accordingly, source device 902 receives a corresponding probe response in the form of CTS packet 920; ¶0067 Based on the receipt of CTS packet 920, source device 902 sends a sequence of data packets to destination device 904. In particular, FIG. 9 shows source device 902 sending data packets 922; ¶0068 […] (as probing packets) RTS packets 946 to destination device 904 ; ¶0069 […] noise on period 908, source device 902 receives a probing response (CTS packet 948) from destination device 904. Accordingly, source device 902 recommences data transmission by sending a data packet 950; NOTE-DISCLOSURE & TEACHING: per ¶0067 Based on the receipt of CTS packet 920, source device 902 sends a sequence of data packets to destination device 904. In particular, FIG. 9 shows source device 902 sending data packets 922 reads on: wherein the processor is configure to transmit a second data packet. Furthermore per ¶0035 i.e. probe packet data rate should be chosen such that the successful transmission of the probe packet indicates a high probability of successful transmission of the data packet reads on: using a second data packet setting. Furthermore per FIG. 9 and shows probe packet 946 RTS and CTS 948 occurring after 922 reads on: that occurs prior to , Furthermore per FIG. 9 ¶0069 i.e. send RTS 945, receives a probing response (CTS packet 948) from destination device 904 reads on: the first access period. Furthermore per FIG. 9 & ¶0035 probe packet data rate should be chosen such that the successful transmission of the probe packet indicates a high probability of successful transmission of the data packet i.e. data rate setting for each data transmission is set to per ¶0035 i.e. the probe packet should have a data rate slightly higher than the initial data rate reads on: wherein the first setting of the wireless transmitter are equal to the second data packet setting of the wireless transmitter i.e. both data 922 and 950 start at the same initial rate ).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the teachings of Sampath in view of HOMCHAUDHUR, with teachings of Gao, since Gao enables procedure which advantageously increases the chance of error free communications in a bursty noise environment (Gao - ¶0021).
Regarding Claim 16. Sampath in view of HOMCHAUDHURI teaches: The device of claim 1,
Sampath in view of HOMCHAUDHURI does not appear to explicitly teach or strongly suggest (Note – see italicized portions): first probe packet is a No-Op packet, a Null Data packet, or a Request to Send (RTS) packet.
Gao teaches: wherein the first probe packet is a No-Op packet(note: limitations separated by a recitation “or” are interpreted as presented in the alternative and not required together i.e. for the purposes of patentable weight),
a Null Data packet (note: limitations separated by a recitation “or” are interpreted as presented in the alternative and not required together i.e. for the purposes of patentable weight),
or(note: limitations separated by a recitation “or” are interpreted as presented in the alternative and not required together i.e. for the purposes of patentable weight)
a Request to Send (RTS) packet (Gao FIG. 9 & ¶0035 See claim 9; ¶0041 See Claim 9; NOTE-DISCLOSURE & TEACHING: per ¶0041 probing packets include (but are not limited to) ready-to-send (RTS) packets reads on: wherein the first probe packet is a Request to Send (RTS) packet ),
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the teachings of Sampath in view of HOMCHAUDHUR, with teachings of Gao, since Gao enables procedure which advantageously increases the chance of error free communications in a bursty noise environment (Gao - ¶0021).
10. Claims 13, 14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sampath in view of HOMCHAUDHURI and IEEE, further in view of further in view of Choi et. al. (US-20040160930-A1) i.e. “Choi”.
Regarding Claim 13. Sampath in view of HOMCHAUDHURI and IEEE teaches: The device of claim 11,
Sampath in view of HOMCHAUDHURI and IEEE does not appear to explicitly teach or strongly suggest (Note – see italicized portions): to obtain the contention-free channel access period using an Carrier-Sense Multiple Access with Collision Avoidance (CSMA/CA)
Choi teaches: wherein the processor is configured to obtain the contention-free channel access period using an Carrier-Sense Multiple Access with Collision Avoidance (CSMA/CA) (Choi – FIG. 3, FIG. 4, FIG. 5, FIG. 12 & ¶0007…media access control (MAC) mechanism of the IEEE 802.11a/g high-speed WLAN involves a distributed coordination function (DCF), under which … back-off algorithm …to reduce ….collisions between a plurality of stations contending for access to a network in a carrier sense multiple access/collision avoidance (CSMA/CA) manner, and a point coordination function (PCF), under which an access point (AP), including a point coordinator (PC), tells the plurality of stations in a contention free period (CFP) when they may place data on the network and transmit the data, through centralized polling scheduling; NOTE-DISCLOSURE & TEACHING: A 802.11 WIFI access scheme where a PCF defines contention free repetition intervals comprising reads on: wherein the processor is configured to obtain the contention-free channel access period , per ¶0007 i.e. using a carrier sense multiple access/collision avoidance (CSMA/CA) manner for collision avoidance reads on: using an Carrier-Sense Multiple Access with Collision Avoidance (CSMA/CA)).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the teachings of Sampath in view of HOMCHAUDHURI and IEEE with the teachings of Choi, since Choi enables transmitting multimedia data over a wireless local area network (WLAN), guaranteeing a multimedia point coordination function (mPCF) period, dynamically allotting a length of the mPCF period over a WLAN so as to transmit a considerable amount of multimedia data, causing a minimum level of overhead, and provide different services for different types of multimedia data (Choi ¶0018).
Regarding Claim 14. Sampath in view of HOMCHAUDHURI and IEEE teaches: The device of claim 11,
Sampath in view of HOMCHAUDHURI and IEEE does not appear to explicitly teach or strongly suggest (Note – see italicized portions): to obtain the contention-free channel access period by receiving a Contention-Free-Poll (CF-Poll) packet;
Choi teaches: wherein the processor is configured to obtain the contention-free channel access period by receiving a Contention-Free-Poll (CF-Poll) packet.
(Choi – FIG. 3, FIG. 4, FIG. 5, FIG. 12 & ¶0007 See claim 13; ¶0010….The CFP begins as soon as the PC broadcasts a beacon frame 311 and ends with a CF-End frame. ; NOTE-DISCLOSURE & TEACHING: A 802.11 WIFI access scheme where a PCF defines contention free repetition intervals comprising CSMA /DCF applied to contention periods i.e. CSMA periods defined by a PCF function, and where a beacon received within a Contention Free period defines the start of a CFP i.e. the CFP is obtained by receiving the beacon/poll reads on: wherein the processor is configured to obtain the contention-free channel access period by receiving a Contention-Free-Poll (CF-Poll) packet where the CFP interval is defined by the PCF protocol )
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the teachings of Sampath in view of HOMCHAUDHURI and IEEE with the teachings of Choi, since Choi enables transmitting multimedia data over a wireless local area network (WLAN), guaranteeing a multimedia point coordination function (mPCF) period, dynamically allotting a length of the mPCF period over a WLAN so as to transmit a considerable amount of multimedia data, causing a minimum level of overhead, and provide different services for different types of multimedia data (Choi ¶0018).
11. Claims 17 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sampath in view of HOMCHAUDHURI, further in view of KASSLIN et. al (US-20110222408-A1) i.e. “KASSLIN”.
Regarding Claim 17. Sampath in view of HOMCHAUDHURI teaches: The device of claim 1,
Sampath in view of HOMCHAUDHURI does not appear to explicitly teach or strongly suggest (Note – see italicized portions): the probe packet comprises a Physical Layer Convergence Protocol (PLCP) protocol data unit (PPDU);
KASSLIN teaches: wherein the first probe packet comprises a Physical Layer Convergence Protocol (PLCP) protocol data unit (PPDU) (KASSLIN - FIG. 1Ab & ¶0103… format for the physical layer convergence procedure (PLCP) protocol data unit (PPDU) in the IEEE 802.11….. In the case of RTS and CTS packets, the duration value T is the remaining duration of the NAV protected time that the transmitter of the TXOP may use to for transmitting the data packet with which they are associated; NOTE-DISCLOSURE & TEACHING: The RTS or CTS control frame type of the PLCP PPDU shows RTS i.e. wherein the first probe packet comprises a Physical Layer Convergence Protocol (PLCP) protocol data unit (PPDU)).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the teachings of Sampath in view of HOMCHAUDHURI with the teachings of KASSLIN, since KASSLIN enables a format for PLCP protocol data unit (PPDU) in IEEE 802.11, where for RTS and CTS a duration of the NAV protected time allows protected packet transmission during the time period (KASSLIN ¶0103).
Allowable Subject Matter
12. Claim 20 is objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable contingent upon or subject to all of the following conditions:
(1) that the claims are rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims as presented by applicant and referenced herein,
(2) that all independent claims were amended with similar, identical and parallel features and amendments in the independent claims representing identical features were submitted in a formal response,
(3) that the claim limitation(s) are not taken alone but in view of the entirety of the claim language including any preceding claim limitations, any proceeding claim limitations, and any intervening claim limitations,
(4) that all pending issues associated with the claims including:
(a) clarifying applicable issues related with claim objections under minor informalities and 112 (b) rejections,
(b) issues related with the entirety of the claim language including any preceding claim limitations, any proceeding claim limitations, and any intervening claim limitations, including the independent claims,
are all acceptably resolved, and do not result in a case where, given the scope of any applicant claimed amendments and/or arguments, examination would require would require further consideration and search.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter:
Regarding Claim 20. The device of claim 1, contingent upon or subject to the conditions noted herein above, the prior art of record fails to disclose, alone, individually or in any reasonable combination, as required by the dependent claim(s): “wherein the processor is configured to: transmit, using a third setting of the wireless transmitter, a third probe packet during the first access period on the wireless channel and before transmitting the first probe packet; wait for a third reply period to determine a third result responsive to the third probe packet; and cause the wireless transmitter to transition to the first setting based on the third result”.
Please note: The examiner notes the above limitation(s) are not taken alone but in view of the entirety of the claim language including any preceding claim limitation, any proceeding claim limitations, and any intervening claim limitations.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MALICK A SOHRAB whose telephone number is (571)272-4347. The examiner can normally be reached on Mo- Fri 9:00 am - 5:30 pm.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, 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 https://ppair-my.uspto.gov/pair/PrivatePair. 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.
/M.A.S./Examiner, Art Unit 2414
Jan 08, 2026
/EDAN ORGAD/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2414