DETAILED ACTION
This communication is in response to Application No. 18/543,197 filed on 12/18/2023. The amendment presented on 3/17/2026, which amends claims 1, 6, 10, and 15, is hereby acknowledged. Claims 1-18 have been examined.
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 .
Specification
The specification is objected to because:
The title of the invention is not descriptive because current title of “communication method and apparatus” is not indicative the claimed invention.
A new title is required that is clearly indicative of the invention to which the claims are directed.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claims 1-18 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.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
Claims 1, 3, 5-6, 9-10, 12, 14-15, and 18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Amicangioli et al. (hereinafter Amicangioli)(US 2022/0045790) in view of Jo et al. (hereinafter Jo)(US 2022/0150770).
Regarding claims 1 and 10, Amicangioli teaches as follows:
A communication apparatus (interpreted as the receive node 420-1 in figure 4), comprising at least one processor and a memory, wherein the memory is configured to store non-transitory instructions (the receive node comprises a processor and a memory, see, ¶ [0112]), and the at least one processor is configured to execute the non-transitory instructions thereby causing the communication apparatus to:
determine that content (interpreted as the data payload) of a to-be-sent second data packet is the same as content of a first data packet (if, at determination block 706, the sequence number of the frame is determined to be an incremented sequence number (e.g., determination block 706==NO), the receive node 420-1 processor can determine that the frame received at block 702 is a repeat frame that encapsulates the same data payload as the most recent original frame at block 720 and thus continue to determination block 722, see, ¶ [0113] and figure 7), wherein the second data packet (interpreted as F0’(seq_1) in figure 4) follows the first data packet (interpreted as F0(seq_0) in figure 4)(a transmit node 410-1 transmits a data payload in an original data frame to a receive node 420-1 and then repeatedly transmits the same data payload in one or more repeat frames without waiting for any acknowledgement (e.g., ACK or NACK) of the original frame from the receive node 420-1, see, ¶ [0089] and figure 4); and
send repetition indication information (interpreted as the repeat indicator or sequence number), wherein the repetition indication information is useable to indicate that the second data packet repeats a previous data packet (it can be useful to identify an original frame and its repeat frames by modifying the frames to include a repeat indicator, such as a sequence number or a Boolean value. For example, in the illustrated embodiment, an incrementing sequence number can be included in the frames to distinguish an original frame from its repeat frames, see, ¶ [0091])(therefore, the repeat indicator was sent within the second data packet).
Amicangioli does not explicitly teach sending repetition indication information instead of sending the second data packet.
Examiner interpreted the repetition indication information as a compressed data packet.
Jo teaches as follows:
The UE retransmits packets, which were not successfully transmitted to the first network, to the second network. When the connection between the UE and the first network is released, and the UE transmits or retransmits the packets to the second network, the UE may stop generating packets containing the full header information, which means that it is allowed that the UE may transmit the packets containing the compressed header information to the second network (see, ¶ [0269]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Amicangioli with Jo to include retransmitting a compressed header information instead of full header information in order to efficiently reduce amount of retransmission (repetition) traffic.
Regarding claims 3, 5, 12, and 14, Amicangioli teaches as follows:
Detecting a first field (interpreted as the payload) in the second data packet, the first field being useable to carry first data; and determining that a first value (interpreted as series of bits represented by the payload) of the first field is the same as a second value of a second field in the first data packet, the second field being useable to carry second data (a transmit node 410-1 transmits a data payload in an original data frame to a receive node 420-1 and then repeatedly transmits the same data payload in one or more repeat frames without waiting for any acknowledgement (e.g., ACK or NACK) of the original frame from the receive node 420-1, see, ¶ [0089] and figure 4).
Regarding claims 6 and 15, Amicangioli teaches as follows:
A communication method, comprising:
Receiving a first data packet
receive repetition indication information (at block 704, the receive node 420-1 processor can read the sequence number from the frame. The sequence number (e.g., 502) can be inserted at any suitable location within the frame (e.g., a frame header or a packet header), see, ¶ [0110] and figure 7); and
generate a second data packet based on the repetition indication information (it can be useful to identify an original frame and its repeat frames by modifying the frames to include a repeat indicator, such as a sequence number or a Boolean value. For example, in the illustrated embodiment, an incrementing sequence number can be included in the frames to distinguish an original frame from its repeat frames, see, ¶ [0091]), wherein first content of the second data packet is the same as second content of the first data packet (if, at determination block 706, the sequence number of the frame is determined to be an incremented sequence number (e.g., determination block 706==NO), the receive node 420-1 processor can determine that the frame received at block 702 is a repeat frame that encapsulates the same data payload as the most recent original frame at block 720 and thus continue to determination block 722, see, ¶ [0113] and figure 7).
Amicangioli does not explicitly teach sending repetition indication information instead of sending the second data packet.
Examiner interpreted the repetition indication information as a compressed data packet.
Jo teaches as follows:
The UE retransmits packets, which were not successfully transmitted to the first network, to the second network. When the connection between the UE and the first network is released, and the UE transmits or retransmits the packets to the second network, the UE may stop generating packets containing the full header information, which means that it is allowed that the UE may transmit the packets containing the compressed header information to the second network (see, ¶ [0269]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Amicangioli with Jo to include retransmitting a compressed header information instead of full header information in order to efficiently reduce amount of retransmission (repetition) traffic.
Regarding claims 9 and 18, Amicangioli teaches as follows:
A transmit node 410-1 transmits a data payload in an original data frame to a receive node 420-1 and then repeatedly transmits the same data payload in one or more repeat frames without waiting for any acknowledgement (e.g., ACK or NACK) of the original frame from the receive node 420-1 (see, ¶ [0089] and figure 4); and
the sequence number processor can send a positive acknowledgment (e.g., ACK) upon successful receipt of the packet or, conversely, a negative acknowledgement (e.g., NACK) when the packet is not received (see, ¶ [0159]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Amicangioli in view of Jo to include the present range of time before retransmitting the same packet after receiving the NACK in order to efficiently prevent sending multiple retransmission.
Claims 2, 7-8, 11, and 16-17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Amicangioli et al. (hereinafter Amicangioli)(US 2022/0045790) view of Jo et al. (hereinafter Jo)(US 2022/0150770), and further in view of You et al. (hereinafter You)(US 2012/0002683).
Regarding claims 2, 7-8, 11, and 16-17, Amicangioli in view of Jo teaches transmitting the repeat indicator or sequence number as presented above except for the well-known compression.
You teaches as follows:
The frame generating unit 650 generates a frame including the compressed header, which is obtained by omitting the repeated items from the header information, the specific preambles, and the payload, and transmits the frame to the receiver (see, ¶ [0088] and figure 6).
Therefore, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Amicangioli in view of Jo with You to include generating the compressed frame header in order to efficiently reduce amount of retransmission (repetition) traffic.
Claims 4 and 13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Amicangioli et al. (hereinafter Amicangioli)(US 2022/0045790) in view of Jo et al. (hereinafter Jo)(US 2022/0150770), and further in view of Sato et al. (hereinafter Sato)(US 2011/0320901).
Regarding claims 4 and 13, Amicangioli in view of Jo teaches all limitations as presented above except for the well-known exclusive OR (XOR).
Sato teaches as follows
The error data comparing unit 32 compares the packet retransmitted based on the error with the packet retained by the error data retaining unit 31 and outputs, as a result of this comparison, information indicating which bit the error corresponds to. For example, the error data comparing unit 32 takes an exclusive OR of the bits of these two packets in sequence, and outputs "false=0" if bits of the two packet are coincident with each other and "true=1" whereas not coincident. Namely, the error bit is indicated depending on which bit becomes "1" (see, ¶ [0045]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Amicangioli in view of Jo with Sato to include the well-known exclusive OR (XOR) operation as taught by Sato in order to efficiently determine the content of second packet is the same as the first packet by comparing series of bits in the payload in two packets.
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 Jeong S Park whose telephone number is (571)270-1597. The examiner can normally be reached Monday through Friday 8:00-4:30 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, Glenton B Burgess can be reached at 571-272-3949. 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.
/JEONG S PARK/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2454 May 20, 2026
Prosecution Insights