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 office action is in response to remarks filed on 04/16/2026.
Claims 1, 2, 4-8, and 10-26 are pending and presented for examination. Claims 1, 2, 4, 6-8, 10, and 12-24 are amended. Claims 3 and 9 are canceled. Claims 25 and 26 are added.
Response to Amendments
Claims 1, 2, 4, 6-8, 10, and 12-24 have been considered based on amendments.
Claims 25 and 26 have been added and considered.
Claims 3 and 9 have been cancelled.
Objections to the term "Wi-Fi" and claim 17 are withdrawn based on amendments.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 18 and 24 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
The term "about" in claims 18 and 24 is a relative term which renders the claims indefinite. The term "about" is not defined by the claims, the specification does not provide a standard for ascertaining the requisite degree, and one of ordinary skill in the art would not be reasonably apprised of the scope of the invention.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or non-obviousness.
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.
Claims 1, 7, 13, and 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Cavalcanti et al (US20220123880A1) (hereinafter "Cavalcanti") in view of Park et al (US20220182933A1) (hereinafter "Park").
Regarding claim 1, Cavalcanti discloses a system for wireless communication, the system comprising:
data processing hardware; and ([0113] The communication station 1100 may also include processing circuitry 1106 and memory 1108 arranged to perform the operations described herein.)
memory hardware in communication with the data processing hardware, the memory hardware storing instructions that when executed on the data processing hardware cause the data processing hardware to perform operations comprising ([0113] The communication station 1100 may also include processing circuitry 1106 and memory 1108 arranged to perform the operations described herein.):
predicting an arrival time for time-sensitive data ([0069] STA Identifier (ID). Identification field to address STA recipient of BE/time-sensitive data. [0070] Segment Length. Length of next segment containing an integer number of MPDUs. This field is used to notify STAs when the next MA is expected to arrive.);
initiating a transmission of a physical layer protocol data unit (PPDU) prior to the predicted arrival time for the time-sensitive data, the PPDU including a preamble and an aggregate medium access control protocol data unit (A-MPDU) ([0111] The frame preemption mechanism of the disclosure enables the transmission of preemptable data along with time-sensitive data packets within the same PPDU. In this way, low priority traffic streams (preemptable data) can be served with the capability of interrupting it if time-sensitive data arrives. Once the transmission of the time-sensitive packet is completed, the interrupted PPDU transmission resumes. P-PPDU packet includes a plurality of MPDU segments of an A-MPDU, each MPDU segment includes one or more MPDUs, and the P-PPDU packet includes a MA for each MPDU segment. [0037] The formed physical protocol data unit (PPDU) may include a preamble and a data field which includes several code words (CWs), e.g., CWs 0-M−1.).
Cavalcanti fails to disclose the system comprising: when an actual arrival time of the time-sensitive data is later than a beginning of a data field of the PPDU, inserting one or more padding subframes in the A-MPDU after the preamble and before a first data-carrying A-MPDU subframe until the time-sensitive data is available for inclusion in the first data-carrying A-MPDU subframe.
However, Park discloses the system comprising: when an actual arrival time of the time-sensitive data is later than a beginning of a data field of the PPDU, inserting one or more padding subframes in the A-MPDU after the preamble and before a first data-carrying A-MPDU subframe until the time-sensitive data is available for inclusion in the first data-carrying A-MPDU subframe ([0079] The preamble 401 and the payload 403 may be consecutive in the time domain, and transmitted as one packet. Alternatively, the preamble 401 and the payload 403 may be transmitted spaced apart by a predetermined time interval 402 in the time domain. Alternatively, the preamble 401 may include a padding region having a length corresponding to the predetermined time interval 402. The preamble 401 including the padding region and the payload 403 may be consecutive in the time domain, and transmitted as one packet. [0087] Alternatively, the size of the padding region in the time domain may be configured to be greater than or equal to the size of the times 430 and 440 corresponding to a period after the packet arrival detection and before the data reception starts.) Cavalcanti and Park are considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because both are in the same endeavor of bandwidth reservation and time-aware scheduling.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have a motivation to combine the teachings of Cavalcanti with Park to create the system comprising: when an actual arrival time of the time-sensitive data is later than a beginning of a data field of the PPDU, inserting one or more padding subframes in the A-MPDU after the preamble and before a first data-carrying A-MPDU subframe until the time-sensitive data is available for inclusion in the first data-carrying A-MPDU subframe.
The motivation to combine both references would come from the need to achieve better quality of service, low worst case latency and high reliable transmission with high efficiency.
Regarding claim 7, Cavalcanti discloses a method for reducing latency of a data transmission, the method comprising:
predicting an arrival time for time-sensitive data ([0069] STA Identifier (ID). Identification field to address STA recipient of BE/time-sensitive data. [0070] Segment Length. Length of next segment containing an integer number of MPDUs. This field is used to notify STAs when the next MA is expected to arrive.);
initiating a physical layer protocol data unit (PPDU) prior to the predicted arrival time for the time-sensitive data, the PPDU including a preamble and an aggregate medium access control protocol data unit (A-MPDU) ([0111] The frame preemption mechanism of the disclosure enables the transmission of preemptable data along with time-sensitive data packets within the same PPDU. In this way, low priority traffic streams (preemptable data) can be served with the capability of interrupting it if time-sensitive data arrives. Once the transmission of the time-sensitive packet is completed, the interrupted PPDU transmission resumes. [0088] At step 910, a P-PPDU packet is encoded. The P-PPDU packet includes a plurality of MPDU segments of an A-MPDU, each MPDU segment includes one or more MPDUs, and the P-PPDU packet includes a MA for each MPDU segment. [0037] The formed physical protocol data unit (PPDU) may include a preamble and a data field which includes several code words (CWs), e.g., CWs 0-M−1.).
Cavalcanti fails to disclose the method comprising: when an actual arrival time of the time-sensitive data is later than a beginning of a data field of the PPDU, inserting one or more padding subframes in the A-MPDU after the preamble and before a first data-carrying A-MPDU subframe until the time-sensitive data is available for inclusion in the first data-carrying A-MPDU subframe.
However, Park discloses the method comprising: when an actual arrival time of the time-sensitive data is later than a beginning of a data field of the PPDU, inserting one or more padding subframes in the A-MPDU after the preamble and before a first data-carrying A-MPDU subframe until the time-sensitive data is available for inclusion in the first data-carrying A-MPDU subframe ([0079] The preamble 401 and the payload 403 may be consecutive in the time domain, and transmitted as one packet. Alternatively, the preamble 401 and the payload 403 may be transmitted spaced apart by a predetermined time interval 402 in the time domain. Alternatively, the preamble 401 may include a padding region having a length corresponding to the predetermined time interval 402. The preamble 401 including the padding region and the payload 403 may be consecutive in the time domain, and transmitted as one packet. [0087] Alternatively, the size of the padding region in the time domain may be configured to be greater than or equal to the size of the times 430 and 440 corresponding to a period after the packet arrival detection and before the data reception starts.) Cavalcanti and Park are considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because both are in the same endeavor of bandwidth reservation and time-aware scheduling.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have a motivation to combine the teachings of Cavalcanti with Park to create the method comprising: when an actual arrival time of the time-sensitive data is later than a beginning of a data field of the PPDU, inserting one or more padding subframes in the A-MPDU after the preamble and before a first data-carrying A-MPDU subframe until the time-sensitive data is available for inclusion in the first data-carrying A-MPDU subframe.
The motivation to combine both references would come from the need to achieve better quality of service, low worst case latency and high reliable transmission with high efficiency.
Regarding claim 13, Cavalcanti discloses a system for wireless communication, the system comprising:
data processing hardware; and ([0113] The communication station 1100 may also include processing circuitry 1106 and memory 1108 arranged to perform the operations described herein.)
memory hardware in communication with the data processing hardware, the memory hardware storing instructions that when executed on the data processing hardware cause the data processing hardware to perform operations comprising ([0113] The communication station 1100 may also include processing circuitry 1106 and memory 1108 arranged to perform the operations described herein.):
reserving a resource unit of a multiplexed physical layer protocol data unit (PPDU) for time-sensitive data ([0040] The frame preemption capability may achieve worst case latency guarantees with high efficiency, as it eliminates the need for un-used times (guard bands) around reserved service period for time-sensitive applications (e.g., as defined by the IEEE 802.1Qbv over IEEE 802.11 mechanism). With frame preemption capabilities, the AP may transmit more BE traffic as it can preempt the transmission only when needed to transmit a time-sensitive frame. [0052] In some embodiments, preemptable STAs may be pooled into different resource allocations of a PPDU, e.g., different RUs. Herein, a preemptable STA is a STA that can be interrupted by time-sensitive data from a higher priority STA or preemptible STA.);
transmitting, on the reserved resource unit, a preamble followed by one or more padding subframes of an aggregate medium access control protocol data unit (A-MPDU) associated with the reserved resource unit when the time-sensitive data is not yet available ([0055] When time-sensitive data needs to be transmitted to STA #11, a MA (e.g., the recent MA) associated with RU #2 may indicate the presence of time-sensitive data for STA #11. STA #2 may read the MA and pauses to process the received P-PPDU until the end of the segment for the STA #11 (e.g., S #1 for the STA #11 as shown in FIG. 6). After STA #11 receives the time-sensitive data, STA #2 may resume the processing of the subsequent segments (e.g., S #2, S #3, etc.). [0057] In some embodiments where wideband-level frame preemption is applied, a wide band MA (WMA) may be used to signal preemptable STAs that the current P-PPDU transmission will be preemptied. Additionally or alternatively, the WMA may be used to indicate new resource allocation for (time-sensitive) data transmission to a new set of preemptable STAs. [0088] At step 910, a P-PPDU packet is encoded. The P-PPDU packet includes a plurality of MPDU segments of an A-MPDU, each MPDU segment includes one or more MPDUs, and the P-PPDU packet includes a MA for each MPDU segment.);
continuing to transmit the one or more padding subframes empty frames on the reserved resource unit until the time sensitive data becomes available; and ([0058] When time-sensitive traffic arrives, padding is added after a MA(s) to align the next MAs of all STAs at an OFDMA symbol level to enable the insertion of a WMA. Padding is added properly so that no segment transmission is interrupted unexpectedly. [0059] In the example of FIG. 7, the frame preemption is based on a new RU allocation. The time-sensitive data packet arrives at the end of transmission of S #1 for STA #2. The AP may generate new dummy segments (padding) to wait for other STAs to finalize their segment transmissions and align all MAs at an OFDMA symbol level.)
before an end of the PPDU, transmitting, on the reserved resource unit, one or more data-carrying A-MPDU subframes containing the time sensitive data ([0059] In the example of FIG. 7, the frame preemption is based on a new RU allocation. The time-sensitive data packet arrives at the end of transmission of S #1 for STA #2. The AP may generate new dummy segments (padding) to wait for other STAs to finalize their segment transmissions and align all MAs at an OFDMA symbol level.).
Regarding claim 19, Cavalcanti discloses a method for reducing latency of a data transmission, the method comprising:
reserving a resource unit of a multiplexed physical layer protocol data unit (PPDU) for time-sensitive data ([0040] The frame preemption capability may achieve worst case latency guarantees with high efficiency, as it eliminates the need for un-used times (guard bands) around reserved service period for time-sensitive applications (e.g., as defined by the IEEE 802.1Qbv over IEEE 802.11 mechanism). With frame preemption capabilities, the AP may transmit more BE traffic as it can preempt the transmission only when needed to transmit a time-sensitive frame. [0052] In some embodiments, preemptable STAs may be pooled into different resource allocations of a PPDU, e.g., different RUs. Herein, a preemptable STA is a STA that can be interrupted by time-sensitive data from a higher priority STA or preemptible STA.);
transmitting, on the reserved resource unit, a preamble followed by one or more padding subframes of an aggregate medium access control protocol data unit (A-MPDU) associated with the reserved resource unit when the time-sensitive data is not yet available ([0055] When time-sensitive data needs to be transmitted to STA #11, a MA (e.g., the recent MA) associated with RU #2 may indicate the presence of time-sensitive data for STA #11. STA #2 may read the MA and pauses to process the received P-PPDU until the end of the segment for the STA #11 (e.g., S #1 for the STA #11 as shown in FIG. 6). After STA #11 receives the time-sensitive data, STA #2 may resume the processing of the subsequent segments (e.g., S #2, S #3, etc.). [0057] In some embodiments where wideband-level frame preemption is applied, a wide band MA (WMA) may be used to signal preemptable STAs that the current P-PPDU transmission will be preemptied. Additionally or alternatively, the WMA may be used to indicate new resource allocation for (time-sensitive) data transmission to a new set of preemptable STAs. [0088] At step 910, a P-PPDU packet is encoded. The P-PPDU packet includes a plurality of MPDU segments of an A-MPDU, each MPDU segment includes one or more MPDUs, and the P-PPDU packet includes a MA for each MPDU segment.;
continuing to transmit the one or more padding subframes on the reserved resource unit until the time sensitive data becomes available; and ([0058] When time-sensitive traffic arrives, padding is added after a MA(s) to align the next MAs of all STAs at an OFDMA symbol level to enable the insertion of a WMA. Padding is added properly so that no segment transmission is interrupted unexpectedly. [0059] In the example of FIG. 7, the frame preemption is based on a new RU allocation. The time-sensitive data packet arrives at the end of transmission of S #1 for STA #2. The AP may generate new dummy segments (padding) to wait for other STAs to finalize their segment transmissions and align all MAs at an OFDMA symbol level.)
before an end of the PPDU, transmitting, on the reserved resource unit, one or more data-carrying A-MPDU subframes containing the time sensitive data ([0059] In the example of FIG. 7, the frame preemption is based on a new RU allocation. The time-sensitive data packet arrives at the end of transmission of S #1 for STA #2. The AP may generate new dummy segments (padding) to wait for other STAs to finalize their segment transmissions and align all MAs at an OFDMA symbol level.).
Claims 2 and 8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Cavalcanti in view of Park, and further in view of Choi et al (WO2011055990A2) (hereinafter "Choi").
Regarding claim 2, Cavalcanti, as modified by Park, fails to disclose the system, the one or more padding subframes comprise start-of-frame padding subframes.
However, Choi discloses the system, the one or more padding subframes comprise start-of-frame padding subframes (Pg. 4, Para. 2: The subframe includes a delimiter, an MPDU and a pad. The delimiter is located in front of the MPDU and is used to distinguish the MPDU. The standard stipulates that the start interval of a sub-frame of an A-MPDU is 32 bits, i.e., an integer multiple of 4 bytes. The pad is used to make the start interval of a sub-frame of an A-MPDU an integer multiple of 32 bits.).
Cavalcanti, as modified by Park, and Choi are considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because both are in the same endeavor of transmitting and receiving packets over a wireless medium.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have a motivation to combine the teachings of Cavalcanti, as modified by Park, with Choi to create the system, the one or more padding subframes comprise start-of-frame padding subframes.
The motivation to combine both references would come from the need to have all UL-MU-MIMO transmissions the same length so that the transmission power level will remain constant.
Regarding claim 8, Cavalcanti, as modified by Park, fails to disclose the method, wherein the one or more padding subframes comprise start-of-frame padding subframes.
However, Choi discloses the method, wherein the one or more padding subframes comprise start-of-frame padding subframes (Pg. 4, Para. 2: The subframe includes a delimiter, an MPDU and a pad. The delimiter is located in front of the MPDU and is used to distinguish the MPDU. The standard stipulates that the start interval of a sub-frame of an A-MPDU is 32 bits, i.e., an integer multiple of 4 bytes. The pad is used to make the start interval of a sub-frame of an A-MPDU an integer multiple of 32 bits.).
Cavalcanti, as modified by Park, and Choi are considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because both are in the same endeavor of transmitting and receiving packets over a wireless medium.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have a motivation to combine the teachings of Cavalcanti, as modified by Park, with Choi to create the method, wherein the one or more padding subframes comprise start-of-frame padding subframes.
The motivation to combine both references would come from the need to have all UL-MU-MIMO transmissions the same length so that the transmission power level will remain constant.
Claims 14, 16-17, 20, and 22-23 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Cavalcanti in view of Park, and further in view of Asterjadhi et al (US20170181187A1) (hereinafter "Asterjadhi").
Regarding claim 14, Cavalcanti, as modified by Park, fails to disclose the system, wherein reserving the resource unit of the multiplexed PPDU comprises reserving a plurality of resource units of the multiplexed PPDU.
However, Asterjadhi discloses the system, wherein reserving the resource unit of the multiplexed PPDU comprises reserving a plurality of resource units of the multiplexed PPDU ([0106] For example, in some embodiments, the AP 110 may provide one or more RUs for STAs to transmit information to the AP 110 in accordance with a contention-based protocol.).
Cavalcanti, as modified by Park, and Asterjadhi are considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because both are in the same endeavor of transmitting and receiving packets over a wireless medium.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have a motivation to combine the teachings of Cavalcanti, as modified by Park, with Asterjadhi to create the system, wherein reserving the resource unit of the multiplexed PPDU comprises reserving a plurality of resource units of the multiplexed PPDU.
The motivation to combine both references would come from the need to increase transmission speeds and improved bandwidth efficiency.
Regarding claim 16, Cavalcanti, as modified by Park, fails to disclose the system, wherein the PPDU is provided using a protocol defined by an Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers (IEEE) 802.11.
However, Asterjadhi discloses the system, wherein the PPDU is provided using a protocol defined by an Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers (IEEE) 802.11 ([0040] In an example, an STA connects to an AP via a Wi-Fi (e.g., IEEE 802.11 protocol such as 802.11ah) compliant wireless link to obtain general connectivity to the Internet or to other wide area networks. In some implementations an STA may also be used as an AP.).
Cavalcanti, as modified by Park, and Asterjadhi are considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because both are in the same endeavor of transmitting and receiving packets over a wireless medium.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have a motivation to combine the teachings of Cavalcanti, as modified by Park, with Asterjadhi to create the system, wherein the PPDU is provided using a protocol defined by an Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers (IEEE) 802.11.
The motivation to combine both references would come from the need to lower deployment associated costs by utilizing a Wi-Fi protocol.
Regarding claim 17, Cavalcanti, as modified by Park, fails to disclose the system, wherein the multiplexed PPDU is an orthogonal frequency division multiple access (OFDMA) PPDU.
However, Asterjadhi discloses the system, wherein the multiplexed PPDU is an orthogonal frequency division multiple access (OFDMA) PPDU ([0041] The techniques described herein may be used for various broadband wireless communication systems, including communication systems that are based on an orthogonal multiplexing scheme. Examples of such communication systems include Spatial Division Multiple Access (SDMA), Time Division Multiple Access (TDMA), Orthogonal Frequency Division Multiple Access (OFDMA) systems, Single-Carrier Frequency Division Multiple Access (SC-FDMA) systems, and so forth. [0096] In one embodiment, the CTX frame 1000 or the CTX frame 1300 may be aggregated in an A-MPDU to provide time to a STA 120 for processing before transmitting the UL signals. In this embodiment, padding or data may be added after the CTX to allow a STA 120 additional time to process the forthcoming packet. … In another embodiment, the padding may be achieved by adding PHY OFDMA symbols, which may include undefined bits not carrying information, or may include bit sequences that carry information, as long as they do not need to be processed within the IFS time.).
Cavalcanti, as modified by Park, and Asterjadhi are considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because both are in the same endeavor of transmitting and receiving packets over a wireless medium.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have a motivation to combine the teachings of Cavalcanti, as modified by Park, with Asterjadhi to create the system, wherein the multiplexed PPDU is an orthogonal frequency division multiple access (OFDMA) PPDU.
The motivation to combine both references would come from the need to increase wireless capacity and efficiency.
Regarding claim 20, Cavalcanti, as modified by Park, fails to disclose the method, wherein reserving the resource unit of the multiplexed PPDU comprises reserving a plurality of resource units of the multiplexed PPDU.
However, Asterjadhi discloses the method, wherein reserving the resource unit of the multiplexed PPDU comprises reserving a plurality of resource units of the multiplexed PPDU ([0106] For example, in some embodiments, the AP 110 may provide one or more RUs for STAs to transmit information to the AP 110 in accordance with a contention-based protocol.).
Cavalcanti, as modified by Park, and Asterjadhi are considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because both are in the same endeavor of transmitting and receiving packets over a wireless medium.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have a motivation to combine the teachings of Cavalcanti, as modified by Park, with Asterjadhi to create the method, wherein reserving the resource unit of the multiplexed PPDU comprises reserving a plurality of resource units of the multiplexed PPDU.
The motivation to combine both references would come from the need to increase transmission speeds and improved bandwidth efficiency.
Regarding claim 22, Cavalcanti, as modified by Park, fails to disclose the system, wherein the PPDU is provided using a protocol defined by an Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers (IEEE) 802.11.
However, Asterjadhi discloses the system, wherein the PPDU is provided using a protocol defined by an Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers (IEEE) 802.11 ([0040] In an example, an STA connects to an AP via a Wi-Fi (e.g., IEEE 802.11 protocol such as 802.11ah) compliant wireless link to obtain general connectivity to the Internet or to other wide area networks. In some implementations an STA may also be used as an AP.).
Cavalcanti, as modified by Park, and Asterjadhi are considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because both are in the same endeavor of transmitting and receiving packets over a wireless medium.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have a motivation to combine the teachings of Cavalcanti, as modified by Park, with Asterjadhi to create the system, wherein the PPDU is provided using a protocol defined by an Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers (IEEE) 802.11.
The motivation to combine both references would come from the need to lower deployment associated costs by utilizing a Wi-Fi protocol.
Regarding claim 23, Cavalcanti, as modified by Park, fails to disclose the system, wherein the multiplexed data transmission is an orthogonal frequency division multiple access (OFDMA) PPDU.
However, Asterjadhi discloses the system, wherein the multiplexed data transmission is an orthogonal frequency division multiple access (OFDMA) PPDU ([0041] The techniques described herein may be used for various broadband wireless communication systems, including communication systems that are based on an orthogonal multiplexing scheme. Examples of such communication systems include Spatial Division Multiple Access (SDMA), Time Division Multiple Access (TDMA), Orthogonal Frequency Division Multiple Access (OFDMA) systems, Single-Carrier Frequency Division Multiple Access (SC-FDMA) systems, and so forth. [0096] In one embodiment, the CTX frame 1000 or the CTX frame 1300 may be aggregated in an A-MPDU to provide time to a STA 120 for processing before transmitting the UL signals. In this embodiment, padding or data may be added after the CTX to allow a STA 120 additional time to process the forthcoming packet. … In another embodiment, the padding may be achieved by adding PHY OFDMA symbols, which may include undefined bits not carrying information, or may include bit sequences that carry information, as long as they do not need to be processed within the IFS time.).
Cavalcanti, as modified by Park, and Asterjadhi are considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because both are in the same endeavor of transmitting and receiving packets over a wireless medium.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have a motivation to combine the teachings of Cavalcanti, as modified by Park, with Asterjadhi to create the system, wherein the multiplexed data transmission is an orthogonal frequency division multiple access (OFDMA) PPDU.
The motivation to combine both references would come from the need to increase wireless capacity and efficiency.
Claims 4-6 and 10-12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Cavalcanti in view of Park, and further in view of Ayadurai et al (US20210351882A1) (hereinafter "Ayadurai").
Regarding claim 4, Cavalcanti, as modified by Park, fails to disclose the system, wherein the transmission of the PPDU is initiated at a time determined to position the first data-carrying A-MPDU subframe a predetermined period of time after the predicted arrival time for the time-sensitive data.
However, Ayadurai discloses the system, wherein the transmission of the PPDU is initiated at a time determined to position the first data-carrying A-MPDU subframe a predetermined period of time after the predicted arrival time for the time-sensitive data ([0036] In some examples, the position of the respective data portion in the packet comprises a predetermined position in the payload shifted by the respective random or pseudorandom time period. For example, if a request to transmit a packet is made at substantially regular or substantially constant time intervals, and a random or pseudorandom time delay t before transmission of a packet is specified, then the position of the data portion in the packet (e.g. within the payload) may be shifted from a predetermined position by an amount equivalent to −t, for example, to compensate for the delay specified for that packet.).
Cavalcanti, as modified by Park, and Ayadurai are considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because both are in the same endeavor of transmitting padding data in a payload until the data portion has been received.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have a motivation to combine the teachings of Cavalcanti, as modified by Park, with Ayadurai to create the system, wherein the transmission of the PPDU is initiated at a time determined to position the first data-carrying A-MPDU subframe a predetermined period of time after the predicted arrival time for the time-sensitive data.
The motivation to combine both references would come from the need to increase efficient use of resources.
Regarding claim 5, Cavalcanti, as modified by Park, fails to disclose the system, wherein the arrival time for the time-sensitive data is predicted using a known time interval between arrivals of successive sets of time sensitive data.
However, Ayadurai discloses the system, wherein the arrival time for the time-sensitive data is predicted using a known time interval between arrivals of successive sets of time sensitive data ([0047] Some example embodiments of this disclosure may be implemented as a software module as part of an existing Wi-Fi 802.11 entity or device, such as for example an Access Point (AP) or Station (STA). The device may be configured to be able to identify the Industrial Ethernet traffic stream, e.g. based on source and/or destination addresses for example, and also to know periodicity of this traffic and possibly also the size of each data portion in this traffic.).
Cavalcanti, as modified by Park, and Ayadurai are considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because both are in the same endeavor of transmitting padding data in a payload until the data portion has been received.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have a motivation to combine the teachings of Cavalcanti, as modified by Park, with Ayadurai to create the system, wherein the arrival time for the time-sensitive data is predicted using a known time interval between arrivals of successive sets of time sensitive data.
The motivation to combine both references would come from the need to increase efficient use of resources.
Regarding claim 6, Cavalcanti, as modified by Park, fails to disclose the system, wherein the PPDU is provided using a protocol defined by an Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers (IEEE) 802.11.
However, Ayadurai discloses the system, wherein the PPDU is provided using a protocol defined by an Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers (IEEE) 802.11 ([0045] Since in some examples the packet length is indicated at the start of the transmission, the transmitter (e.g. Wi-Fi device connected to the sending node) may specify an oversized transmission of up to 1500-bytes at the start of the transmission (e.g. in the packet header), and hence may need to fill the end of the packet (e.g. the portion of the payload following the data portion) with padding data.).
Cavalcanti, as modified by Park, and Ayadurai are considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because both are in the same endeavor of transmitting padding data in a payload until the data portion has been received.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have a motivation to combine the teachings of Cavalcanti, as modified by Park, with Ayadurai to create the system, wherein the PPDU is provided using a protocol defined by an Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers (IEEE) 802.11.
The motivation to combine both references would come from the need to lower deployment associated costs by utilizing a Wi-Fi protocol.
Regarding claim 10, Cavalcanti, as modified by Park, fails to disclose the system, wherein the transmission of the PPDU is initiated at a time determined to position the beginning of the first data-carrying A-MPDU subframe at a predetermined period of time after the predicted arrival time for the time-sensitive data.
However, Ayadurai discloses the method, wherein the transmission of the PPDU is initiated at a time determined to position the beginning of the first data-carrying A-MPDU subframe at a predetermined period of time after the predicted arrival time for the time-sensitive data ([0036] In some examples, the position of the respective data portion in the packet comprises a predetermined position in the payload shifted by the respective random or pseudorandom time period. For example, if a request to transmit a packet is made at substantially regular or substantially constant time intervals, and a random or pseudorandom time delay t before transmission of a packet is specified, then the position of the data portion in the packet (e.g. within the payload) may be shifted from a predetermined position by an amount equivalent to −t, for example, to compensate for the delay specified for that packet.).
Cavalcanti, as modified by Park, and Ayadurai are considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because both are in the same endeavor of transmitting padding data in a payload until the data portion has been received.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have a motivation to combine the teachings of Cavalcanti, as modified by Park, with Ayadurai to create the system, wherein the transmission of the PPDU is initiated at a time determined to position the beginning of the first data-carrying A-MPDU subframe at a predetermined period of time after the predicted arrival time for the time-sensitive data.
The motivation to combine both references would come from the need to increase efficient use of resources.
Regarding claim 11, Cavalcanti, as modified by Park, fails to disclose the system, wherein the arrival time for the time-sensitive data is predicted using a known time interval between arrivals of successive sets of time sensitive data.
However, Ayadurai discloses the method, wherein the arrival time for the time-sensitive data is predicted using a known time interval between arrivals of successive sets of time sensitive data ([0047] Some example embodiments of this disclosure may be implemented as a software module as part of an existing Wi-Fi 802.11 entity or device, such as for example an Access Point (AP) or Station (STA). The device may be configured to be able to identify the Industrial Ethernet traffic stream, e.g. based on source and/or destination addresses for example, and also to know periodicity of this traffic and possibly also the size of each data portion in this traffic.).
Cavalcanti, as modified by Park, and Ayadurai are considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because both are in the same endeavor of transmitting padding data in a payload until the data portion has been received.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have a motivation to combine the teachings of Cavalcanti, as modified by Park, with Ayadurai to create the system, wherein the arrival time for the time-sensitive data is predicted using a known time interval between arrivals of successive sets of time sensitive data.
The motivation to combine both references would come from the need to increase efficient use of resources.
Regarding claim 12, Cavalcanti, as modified by Park, fails to disclose the system, wherein the PPDU is provided using a protocol defined by an Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers (IEEE) 802.11.
However, Ayadurai discloses the method, wherein the PPDU is provided using a protocol defined by an Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers (IEEE) 802.11 ([0045] Since in some examples the packet length is indicated at the start of the transmission, the transmitter (e.g. Wi-Fi device connected to the sending node) may specify an oversized transmission of up to 1500-bytes at the start of the transmission (e.g. in the packet header), and hence may need to fill the end of the packet (e.g. the portion of the payload following the data portion) with padding data.).
Cavalcanti, as modified by Park, and Ayadurai are considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because both are in the same endeavor of transmitting padding data in a payload until the data portion has been received.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have a motivation to combine the teachings of Cavalcanti, as modified by Park, with Ayadurai to create the system, wherein the PPDU is provided using a protocol defined by an Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers (IEEE) 802.11.
The motivation to combine both references would come from the need to lower deployment associated costs by utilizing a Wi-Fi protocol.
Claims 18 and 24 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Cavalcanti in view of Park, and further in view of Bharadwaj et al (US20170064718A1) (hereinafter "Bharadwaj").
Regarding claim 18, Cavalcanti, as modified by Park, fails to disclose the system, wherein the reserved resource unit is allocated about 20 MHz of bandwidth.
However, Bharadwaj discloses the system, wherein the reserved resource unit is allocated about 20 MHz of bandwidth ([0062] In some examples a number of bits, in addition to the common block bits used to identify how a data field is partitioned amongst devices (e.g. partitioning of the data field into RUs), in the common block field, an additional N bits may be provided in the common block field. These N bits may be common to all users in the PPDU, or common to all users in a 20 MHz channel. These bits may not be a part of a resource allocation field of the common block field, but may be used to convey other types of information, for example bits indicating padding or packet extension, legacy training field (LTF), compression indication, number of LTFs in the PPDU, etc. [0105] The first common block 605-a is associated with the second and fourth 20 MHz resource units, while common block 605-b is associated with the first and third 20 MHz resource units. The dedicated content for the 26 center tones is provided at the end of the primary 20 MHz channel in center dedicated content block 615-a. The secondary 20 MHz channel includes a padding field 620 to compensate for the disparity in signaling between the secondary and primary 20 MHz channels.).
Cavalcanti, as modified by Park, and Bharadwaj are considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because both are in the same endeavor of signaling and resource allocation in a preamble.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have a motivation to combine the teachings of Cavalcanti, as modified by Park, with Bharadwaj to create the system, wherein the reserved resource unit is allocated about 20 MHz of bandwidth.
The motivation to combine both references would come from the need to compensate for the disparity in signaling between channels.
Regarding claim 24, Cavalcanti, as modified by Park, fails to disclose the system, wherein the reserved resource unit is allocated about 20 MHz of bandwidth.
However, Bharadwaj discloses the system, wherein the reserved resource unit is allocated about 20 MHz of bandwidth ([0062] In some examples a number of bits, in addition to the common block bits used to identify how a data field is partitioned amongst devices (e.g. partitioning of the data field into RUs), in the common block field, an additional N bits may be provided in the common block field. These N bits may be common to all users in the PPDU, or common to all users in a 20 MHz channel. These bits may not be a part of a resource allocation field of the common block field, but may be used to convey other types of information, for example bits indicating padding or packet extension, legacy training field (LTF), compression indication, number of LTFs in the PPDU, etc. [0105] The first common block 605-a is associated with the second and fourth 20 MHz resource units, while common block 605-b is associated with the first and third 20 MHz resource units. The dedicated content for the 26 center tones is provided at the end of the primary 20 MHz channel in center dedicated content block 615-a. The secondary 20 MHz channel includes a padding field 620 to compensate for the disparity in signaling between the secondary and primary 20 MHz channels.).
Cavalcanti, as modified by Park, and Bharadwaj are considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because both are in the same endeavor of signaling and resource allocation in a preamble.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have a motivation to combine the teachings of Cavalcanti, as modified by Park, with Bharadwaj to create the system, wherein the reserved resource unit is allocated about 20 MHz of bandwidth.
The motivation to combine both references would come from the need to compensate for the disparity in signaling between channels.
Claims 15 and 21 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Cavalcanti in view of Park, and further in view of Seok et al (US20160056930A1) (hereinafter "Seok").
Regarding claim 15, Cavalcanti, as modified by Park, fails to disclose the system, wherein transmitting the preamble followed by the one or more padding subframes on the reserved resource unit comprises transmitting a preamble followed by one or more padding subframes on each of the plurality of reserved resource units.
However, Seok discloses the system, wherein transmitting the preamble followed by the one or more padding subframes on the reserved resource unit comprises transmitting a preamble followed by one or more padding subframes on each of the plurality of reserved resource units ([0182] Further, a padding according to the present invention may be applied individually to each subchannel (or resource unit) of a DL/UL MU PPDU. For example, a plurality of subchannels allocated in one transmission channel (e.g., a 20-MHz bandwidth) may be allocated to a plurality of STAs.).
Cavalcanti, as modified by Park, and Seok are considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because both are in the same endeavor of transmitting and receiving signals in a Wireless Local Area Network.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have a motivation to combine the teachings of Cavalcanti, as modified by Park, with Seok to create the system, wherein transmitting the preamble followed by the one or more padding subframes on the reserved resource unit comprises transmitting a preamble followed by one or more padding subframes on each of the plurality of reserved resource units.
The motivation to combine both references would come from the need to increase the data rate.
Regarding claim 21, Cavalcanti, as modified by Park, fails to disclose the system, wherein transmitting the preamble followed by the one or more padding subframes on the reserved resource unit comprises transmitting a preamble followed by one or more padding subframes on each of the plurality of reserved resource units.
However, Seok discloses the system, wherein transmitting the preamble followed by the one or more padding subframes on the reserved resource unit comprises transmitting a preamble followed by one or more padding subframes on each of the plurality of reserved resource units ([0182] Further, a padding according to the present invention may be applied individually to each subchannel (or resource unit) of a DL/UL MU PPDU. For example, a plurality of subchannels allocated in one transmission channel (e.g., a 20-MHz bandwidth) may be allocated to a plurality of STAs.).
Cavalcanti, as modified by Park, and Seok are considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because both are in the same endeavor of transmitting and receiving signals in a Wireless Local Area Network.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have a motivation to combine the teachings of Cavalcanti, as modified by Park, with Seok to create the system, wherein transmitting the preamble followed by the one or more padding subframes on the reserved resource unit comprises transmitting a preamble followed by one or more padding subframes on each of the plurality of reserved resource units.
The motivation to combine both references would come from the need to increase the data rate.
Claims 25 and 26 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Cavalcanti in view of Park, and further in view of Chu et al (US20160134406A1) (hereinafter "Chu").
Regarding claim 25, Cavalcanti, as modified by Park, fails to disclose the system, wherein delimiters of the one or more padding subframes have an end-of-frame bit set to 0 because one or more data-carrying A-MPDU subframes are expected to follow the one or more padding subframes.
However, Chu discloses the system, wherein delimiters of the one or more padding subframes have an end-of-frame bit set to 0 because one or more data-carrying A-MPDU subframes are expected to follow the one or more padding subframes ([0114] In an embodiment, the A-MPDU subframe 854 includes an MPDU delimiter field having an EOF flag set to a value to indicate that the A-MPDU subframe 854 is not the last subframe in the A-MPDU 850 (e.g., the EOF flag is set to zero).).
Cavalcanti, as modified by Park, and Chu are considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because both are in the same endeavor of padding subframes and frame structures.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have a motivation to combine the teachings of Cavalcanti, as modified by Park, with Chu to create the system, wherein delimiters of the one or more padding subframes have an end-of-frame bit set to 0 because one or more data-carrying A-MPDU subframes are expected to follow the one or more padding subframes.
The motivation to combine both references would come from the need to indicate frame continuity to the receiver.
Regarding claim 26, Cavalcanti, as modified by Park, fails to disclose the method, wherein delimiters of the one or more padding subframes have an end-of-frame bit set to 0 because one or more data-carrying A-MPDU subframes are expected to follow the one or more padding subframes.
However, Chu discloses the method, wherein delimiters of the one or more padding subframes have an end-of-frame bit set to 0 because one or more data-carrying A-MPDU subframes are expected to follow the one or more padding subframes ([0114] In an embodiment, the A-MPDU subframe 854 includes an MPDU delimiter field having an EOF flag set to a value to indicate that the A-MPDU subframe 854 is not the last subframe in the A-MPDU 850 (e.g., the EOF flag is set to zero).).
Cavalcanti, as modified by Park, and Chu are considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because both are in the same endeavor of padding subframes and frame structures.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have a motivation to combine the teachings of Cavalcanti, as modified by Park, with Chu to create the method, wherein delimiters of the one or more padding subframes have an end-of-frame bit set to 0 because one or more data-carrying A-MPDU subframes are expected to follow the one or more padding subframes.
The motivation to combine both references would come from the need to indicate frame continuity to the receiver.
Response to Arguments
22. Applicant’s arguments with respect to claims 1, 7, 13, and 19, and associated dependent claims have been considered, but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to D. Little whose telephone number is (571)272-5748. The examiner can normally be reached M-Th 8-6 ET.
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, Nishant Divecha can be reached at 571-270-3125. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of published or unpublished applications may be obtained from Patent Center. Unpublished application information in Patent Center is available to registered users. To file and manage patent submissions in Patent Center, visit: https://patentcenter.uspto.gov. Visit https://www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/patent-center for more information about Patent Center and https://www.uspto.gov/patents/docx for information about filing in DOCX format. For additional questions, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/D LITTLE/Examiner, Art Unit 2419
/Nishant Divecha/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2419
Prosecution Insights