DETAILED ACTION
Response to Amendment
In response to amendment filed on 6/29/2026, claims 1- 20 are pending for examinations.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed on 6/29/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. On page 8 last three paragraphs of the remarks filed on 6/29/2026, applicant argues, “Aly does not disclose "verification code detection in a packet." It is notable that the Office Action misquotes claim 1 here, as the reference cited by the Office Action as allegedly disclosing the claim language not disclosed by Aly also does not disclose the quoted claim language. The rejection may thus hinge on a misreading of claim 1. Claim 1 recites circuitry configured to detect failure of at least one communications channel of a communications bus "based at least in part on a header verification code included in a header." The Office Action cites to Bayk as allegedly disclosing "an acknowledgement frame may be sent based on detecting an error in a physical layer header" (Office Action, page 4, citing to [0004] of Bayk). The cited sections of Bayk are entirely silent on circuitry configured to detect failure of at least one communications channel of a communications bus "based at least in part on a header verification code included in a header," as recited in claim 1”.
Examiner disagrees and respectfully submits that Bayk teaches in [0004] about , “…For example, an acknowledgement frame may be sent based on detecting an error in a physical layer header (i.e. PHY header) or a medium access control protocol data unit, without waiting for transmission of a data unit to be completed. Data transmission may stopped or continued, for example, based on a characteristic of a detected error. For example, if an error is detected in a physical header, an acknowledgement frame may be sent and the transmission of the data unit may be stopped; or, if an error is detected in a medium access control protocol data unit, an acknowledgement frame may be sent and the error may be recorded without stopping the transmission of the data unit. A second link may be monitored for acknowledgement frames during a data transmission on a first link so that timely actions may be taken and/or delays in transmission may be avoided and/or reduced.”; now in above context read [0048]… a determination may be made as to whether an error has been detected in the PHY header. For example, for a PPDU such as PPDU 300A, an error in the PHY header may correspond to an error value or a validate value in the U-SIG or the EHT-SIG-B field of the PPDU. For a PPDU such as PPDU 300B, an error in the PHY header may correspond to an error value or a validate value in the U-SIG or the UHR-SIG field of the PPDU; see [0056]… For example, for a PPDU such as PPDU 300A, an error in the PHY header may correspond to an error value or a validate value in the U-SIG or the EHT-SIG-B field of the PPDU. For another example, for a PPDU such as PPDU 300B, an error in the PHY header may correspond to an error value or a validate value in the U-SIG or the UHR-SIG field of the PPDU. For example, an error in an MPDU of the PPDU may correspond to an error in a Frame Check Sequence (FCS) associated with the MPDU.; see [0063]… for example, if detecting an error in the PHY header 806 of the PPDU 814. In the example 800, the STA 804 may detect an error in the PHY header 806 of the PPDU 814 and proceed to send (e.g., transmit) an acknowledgement (e.g., XACK) frame 808 on the second link.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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.
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 nonobviousness.
Claim(s) 1- 2, 4, 8- 9, 11, 15- 16, 18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Aly et al. (US Pub. No. 2023/0276428 A1) in view of Baykas et al. (US Pub. No. 2024/0204965 A1), hereafter Bayk.
Regarding claim 1, Aly teaches a computing device, comprising:
failure detection circuitry configured to detect a failure of at least one communications channel of two or more communications channels of a data communications bus based at least in part on a header verification code included in a header of a first packet that was communicated over the two or more communications channels (see claim 1 .. host device (computing device) comprising: a first wireless radio configured to wirelessly communicate within a first band that includes a plurality of channels; a second wireless radio configured to wirelessly communicate within a second band that at least partly overlaps with the first band; and a hardware processor configured to: use the first wireless radio to establish a first wireless connection with a first device using a first subset of channels in the plurality of channels; determine an error rate for each of the plurality of channels; in response to determining that the error rate for one or more of the first subset of channels exceeds a predetermined threshold error rate, identify a second subset of channels based at least partly on the second subset exhibiting a lower error rate than the first subset; and attempt to connect to the first device using the second subset of channels); and
data communication circuitry to perform data communication of a second packet over a subset of the two or more communications channels that excludes the at least one communications channel based on the failure of the at least one communications channel (see claim 1…in response to determining that the error rate for one or more of the first subset of channels exceeds a predetermined threshold error rate, identify a second subset of channels based at least partly on the second subset exhibiting a lower error rate than the first subset; and attempt to connect to the first device using the second subset of channels; further see claim 5 wherein identifying the second subset of channels further comprises: identifying a second channel of the plurality of channels that has an error rate less than the predetermined error rate; and replacing a first channel in the first subset of channels with the second channel to determine the second subset of channels); but Aly fails to teach about a verification code detection in a packet ; however Bayk teaches in [0004] regarding…computing device, such as a station, may communicate with an access point or another station. Communications may occur via different links (e.g., frequency bands). For example, a data unit may be communicated via a first link, and an acknowledgement frame may be communicated via a second link. The acknowledgement frame may overlap with transmission of the data unit. For example, an acknowledgement frame may be sent based on detecting an error in a physical layer header or a medium access control protocol data unit, without waiting for transmission of a data unit to be completed….For example, if an error is detected in a physical header, an acknowledgement frame may be sent and the transmission of the data unit may be stopped; or, if an error is detected in a medium access control protocol data unit, an acknowledgement frame may be sent and the error may be recorded without stopping the transmission of the data unit. A second link may be monitored for acknowledgement frames during a data transmission on a first link so that timely actions may be taken and/or delays in transmission may be avoided and/or reduced.. It would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill, in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention was made to consider the teachings of Bayk with the teachings of Aly to make system more effective. Having a mechanism wherein failure detection based on header verification code; greater way more reliable communication can be carried out in the communication system.
Regarding claim 2, Aly in view of Bayk teaches as per claim 1, wherein the data communication circuitry is configured to perform the data communication by:
excluding from the subset of the two or more communications channels, in response to detecting a failure to verify the header of the first packet based on the header verification code, a particular communication channel over which communication of the header of the first packet occurred; Aly see claim 1…in response to determining that the error rate for one or more of the first subset of channels exceeds a predetermined threshold error rate, identify a second subset of channels based at least partly on the second subset exhibiting a lower error rate than the first subset; and attempt to connect to the first device using the second subset of channels (i.e. excluding from the subset of the two or more communications channels, in response to detecting a failure); further see claim 5 wherein identifying the second subset of channels further comprises: identifying a second channel of the plurality of channels that has an error rate less than the predetermined error rate; and replacing a first channel in the first subset of channels with the second channel to determine the second subset of channels.
Regarding claim 4, Aly in view of Bayk teaches as per claim 1, wherein the data communication circuitry is configured to perform the data communication by:
excluding from the subset of the two or more communications channels, in response to detecting verification of the header of the first packet based on the header verification code and detecting failure to verify a payload of the first packet, a particular communication channel over which communication of at least part of the payload of the first packet occurred; Bayk teaches in [0004] regarding…computing device, such as a station, may communicate with an access point or another station. Communications may occur via different links (e.g., frequency bands). For example, a data unit may be communicated via a first link, and an acknowledgement frame may be communicated via a second link. The acknowledgement frame may overlap with transmission of the data unit. For example, an acknowledgement frame may be sent based on detecting an error in a physical layer header or a medium access control protocol data unit, without waiting for transmission of a data unit to be completed….For example, if an error is detected in a physical header, an acknowledgement frame may be sent and the transmission of the data unit may be stopped; or, if an error is detected in a medium access control protocol data unit (i.e. carries both payload and header), an acknowledgement frame may be sent and the error may be recorded without stopping the transmission of the data unit. A second link may be monitored for acknowledgement frames during a data transmission on a first link so that timely actions may be taken and/or delays in transmission may be avoided and/or reduced..
Regarding claim 8, Aly teaches a system comprising: a data communication bus including two or more communications channels; a first device connected to the data communication bus and configured to detect a failure of at least one communications channel of the two or more communications channels based at least in part on a header verification code included in a header of a first packet that was communicated over the two or more communications channels (see claim 1 .. host device (computing device) comprising: a first wireless radio configured to wirelessly communicate within a first band that includes a plurality of channels; a second wireless radio configured to wirelessly communicate within a second band that at least partly overlaps with the first band; and a hardware processor configured to: use the first wireless radio to establish a first wireless connection with a first device using a first subset of channels in the plurality of channels; determine an error rate for each of the plurality of channels; in response to determining that the error rate for one or more of the first subset of channels exceeds a predetermined threshold error rate, identify a second subset of channels based at least partly on the second subset exhibiting a lower error rate than the first subset; and attempt to connect to the first device using the second subset of channels); and
a second device connected to the data communication bus, wherein the first device is configured to perform data communication of a second packet to the second device over a subset of the two or more communications channels that excludes the at least one communications channel based on the failure of the at least one communications channel (see claim 1…in response to determining that the error rate for one or more of the first subset of channels exceeds a predetermined threshold error rate, identify a second subset of channels based at least partly on the second subset exhibiting a lower error rate than the first subset; and attempt to connect to the first device using the second subset of channels; further see claim 5 wherein identifying the second subset of channels further comprises: identifying a second channel of the plurality of channels that has an error rate less than the predetermined error rate; and replacing a first channel in the first subset of channels with the second channel to determine the second subset of channels); but Aly fails to teach about a verification code detection in a packet ; however Bayk teaches in [0004] regarding…computing device, such as a station, may communicate with an access point or another station. Communications may occur via different links (e.g., frequency bands). For example, a data unit may be communicated via a first link, and an acknowledgement frame may be communicated via a second link. The acknowledgement frame may overlap with transmission of the data unit. For example, an acknowledgement frame may be sent based on detecting an error in a physical layer header or a medium access control protocol data unit, without waiting for transmission of a data unit to be completed….For example, if an error is detected in a physical header, an acknowledgement frame may be sent and the transmission of the data unit may be stopped; or, if an error is detected in a medium access control protocol data unit, an acknowledgement frame may be sent and the error may be recorded without stopping the transmission of the data unit. A second link may be monitored for acknowledgement frames during a data transmission on a first link so that timely actions may be taken and/or delays in transmission may be avoided and/or reduced.. It would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill, in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention was made to consider the teachings of Bayk with the teachings of Aly to make system more effective. Having a mechanism wherein failure detection based on header verification code; greater way more reliable communication can be carried out in the communication system.
Regarding claim 9, Aly in view of Bayk teaches as per claim 8, wherein the first device is configured to perform the data communication by: excluding from the subset of the two or more communications channels, in response to detecting a failure to verify the header of the first packet based on the header verification code, a particular communication channel over which communication of the header of the first packet occurred; Aly see claim 1…in response to determining that the error rate for one or more of the first subset of channels exceeds a predetermined threshold error rate, identify a second subset of channels based at least partly on the second subset exhibiting a lower error rate than the first subset; and attempt to connect to the first device using the second subset of channels (i.e. excluding from the subset of the two or more communications channels, in response to detecting a failure); further see claim 5 wherein identifying the second subset of channels further comprises: identifying a second channel of the plurality of channels that has an error rate less than the predetermined error rate; and replacing a first channel in the first subset of channels with the second channel to determine the second subset of channels.
Regarding claim 11, Aly in view of Bayk teaches as per claim 9, wherein the first device is configured to perform the data communication by: excluding from the subset of the two or more communications channels, in response to detecting verification of the header of the first packet based on the header verification code and detecting failure to verify a payload of the first packet, a particular communication channel over which communication of at least part of the payload of the first packet occurred; Bayk teaches in [0004] regarding…computing device, such as a station, may communicate with an access point or another station. Communications may occur via different links (e.g., frequency bands). For example, a data unit may be communicated via a first link, and an acknowledgement frame may be communicated via a second link. The acknowledgement frame may overlap with transmission of the data unit. For example, an acknowledgement frame may be sent based on detecting an error in a physical layer header or a medium access control protocol data unit, without waiting for transmission of a data unit to be completed….For example, if an error is detected in a physical header, an acknowledgement frame may be sent and the transmission of the data unit may be stopped; or, if an error is detected in a medium access control protocol data unit (i.e. carries both payload and header), an acknowledgement frame may be sent and the error may be recorded without stopping the transmission of the data unit. A second link may be monitored for acknowledgement frames during a data transmission on a first link so that timely actions may be taken and/or delays in transmission may be avoided and/or reduced..
Regarding claim 15, Aly teaches a computer-implemented method comprising:
detecting, by at least one processor, a failure of at least one communications channel of two or more communications channels of a data communications bus based at least in part on a header verification code included in a header of a first packet that was communicated over the two or more communications channels (see claim 1 .. host device (computing device) comprising: a first wireless radio configured to wirelessly communicate within a first band that includes a plurality of channels; a second wireless radio configured to wirelessly communicate within a second band that at least partly overlaps with the first band; and a hardware processor configured to: use the first wireless radio to establish a first wireless connection with a first device using a first subset of channels in the plurality of channels; determine an error rate for each of the plurality of channels; in response to determining that the error rate for one or more of the first subset of channels exceeds a predetermined threshold error rate, identify a second subset of channels based at least partly on the second subset exhibiting a lower error rate than the first subset; and attempt to connect to the first device using the second subset of channels); and
performing, by the at least one processor, data communication of a second packet over a subset of the two or more communications channels that excludes the at least one communications channel based on the failure of the at least one communications channel (see claim 1…in response to determining that the error rate for one or more of the first subset of channels exceeds a predetermined threshold error rate, identify a second subset of channels based at least partly on the second subset exhibiting a lower error rate than the first subset; and attempt to connect to the first device using the second subset of channels; further see claim 5 wherein identifying the second subset of channels further comprises: identifying a second channel of the plurality of channels that has an error rate less than the predetermined error rate; and replacing a first channel in the first subset of channels with the second channel to determine the second subset of channels); but Aly fails to teach about a verification code detection in a packet ; however Bayk teaches in [0004] regarding…computing device, such as a station, may communicate with an access point or another station. Communications may occur via different links (e.g., frequency bands). For example, a data unit may be communicated via a first link, and an acknowledgement frame may be communicated via a second link. The acknowledgement frame may overlap with transmission of the data unit. For example, an acknowledgement frame may be sent based on detecting an error in a physical layer header or a medium access control protocol data unit, without waiting for transmission of a data unit to be completed….For example, if an error is detected in a physical header, an acknowledgement frame may be sent and the transmission of the data unit may be stopped; or, if an error is detected in a medium access control protocol data unit, an acknowledgement frame may be sent and the error may be recorded without stopping the transmission of the data unit. A second link may be monitored for acknowledgement frames during a data transmission on a first link so that timely actions may be taken and/or delays in transmission may be avoided and/or reduced.. It would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill, in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention was made to consider the teachings of Bayk with the teachings of Aly to make system more effective. Having a mechanism wherein failure detection based on header verification code; greater way more reliable communication can be carried out in the communication system.
Regarding claim 16, Aly in view of Bayk teaches as per claim 15, wherein performing the data communication further includes: excluding from the subset of the two or more communications channels, in response to detecting a failure to verify the header of the first packet based on the header verification code, a particular communication channel over which communication of the header of the first packet occurred; Aly see claim 1…in response to determining that the error rate for one or more of the first subset of channels exceeds a predetermined threshold error rate, identify a second subset of channels based at least partly on the second subset exhibiting a lower error rate than the first subset; and attempt to connect to the first device using the second subset of channels (i.e. excluding from the subset of the two or more communications channels, in response to detecting a failure); further see claim 5 wherein identifying the second subset of channels further comprises: identifying a second channel of the plurality of channels that has an error rate less than the predetermined error rate; and replacing a first channel in the first subset of channels with the second channel to determine the second subset of channels.
Regarding claim 18, Aly in view of Bayk teaches as per claim 15, wherein performing the data communication further includes: excluding from the subset of the two or more communications channels, in response to detecting verification of the header of the first packet based on the header verification code and detecting failure to verify a payload of the first packet, a particular communication channel over which communication of at least part of the payload of the first packet occurred; Bayk teaches in [0004] regarding…computing device, such as a station, may communicate with an access point or another station. Communications may occur via different links (e.g., frequency bands). For example, a data unit may be communicated via a first link, and an acknowledgement frame may be communicated via a second link. The acknowledgement frame may overlap with transmission of the data unit. For example, an acknowledgement frame may be sent based on detecting an error in a physical layer header or a medium access control protocol data unit, without waiting for transmission of a data unit to be completed….For example, if an error is detected in a physical header, an acknowledgement frame may be sent and the transmission of the data unit may be stopped; or, if an error is detected in a medium access control protocol data unit (i.e. carries both payload and header), an acknowledgement frame may be sent and the error may be recorded without stopping the transmission of the data unit. A second link may be monitored for acknowledgement frames during a data transmission on a first link so that timely actions may be taken and/or delays in transmission may be avoided and/or reduced..
Claim(s) 3, 5, 10, 12, 17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Aly et al. (US Pub. No. 2023/0276428 A1) in view of Baykas et al. (US Pub. No. 2024/0204965 A1), hereafter Bayk and in further view of Wang et al. (CN111262868A).
Regarding claim 3, Aly in view of Bayk teaches as per claim 2, but fails to teach about wherein the data communication circuitry is configured to perform the data communication by:
including in a header of the second packet a second header verification code generated from a header of the second packet but not a payload of the second packet; and
dynamically reallocating the header of the second packet to a preset location among the two or more communications channels; however Wang teaches… generating a message header and message content according to a message to be sent, wherein the message header comprises message length information and a source node serial number of the sent message, and the message content is represented in a message key-message value pair form; generating a verification code vector based on the message header and message content and the key list; and forming a sending message packet by the message header, the message content and the verification code vector, and sending the sending message packet. The receiving method adopts a key list corresponding to the receiving node to verify the received message and stores the message passing the verification in a hash table of a system memory. It would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill, in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention was made to consider the teachings of Wang with the teachings of Aly in view of Bayk to make system more standardized. Having a mechanism wherein the data communication circuitry is configured to perform the data communication by:
including in a header of the second packet a second header verification code generated from a header of the second packet but not a payload of the second packet; and
dynamically reallocating the header of the second packet to a preset location among the two or more communications channels; more standardized approach can be carried out in the communication system.
Regarding claim 5, Aly in view of Bayk teaches as per claim 4, but fails to teach about wherein the data communication circuitry is configured to perform the data communication by: performing, in response to detecting verification of a header of the second packet and verification of a payload of the second packet, data communication of a third packet over the subset of the two or more communications channels; however Wang teaches… generating a message header and message content according to a message to be sent, wherein the message header comprises message length information and a source node serial number of the sent message, and the message content is represented in a message key-message value pair form; generating a verification code vector based on the message header and message content and the key list; and forming a sending message packet by the message header, the message content and the verification code vector, and sending the sending message packet. The receiving method adopts a key list corresponding to the receiving node to verify the received message and stores the message passing the verification in a hash table of a system memory. It would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill, in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention was made to consider the teachings of Wang with the teachings of Aly in view of Bayk to make system more standardized. Having a mechanism wherein the data communication circuitry is configured to perform the data communication by: performing, in response to detecting verification of a header of the second packet and verification of a payload of the second packet, data communication of a third packet over the subset of the two or more communications channels; more standardized approach can be carried out in the communication system.
Regarding claim 10, Aly in view of Bayk teaches as per claim 9, but fails to teach about wherein the first device is configured to perform the data communication by: including in a header of the second packet a second header verification code generated from a header of the second packet but not a payload of the second packet; and dynamically reallocating the header of the second packet to a preset location among the two or more communications channels; generating a verification code vector based on the message header and message content and the key list; and forming a sending message packet by the message header, the message content and the verification code vector, and sending the sending message packet. The receiving method adopts a key list corresponding to the receiving node to verify the received message and stores the message passing the verification in a hash table of a system memory. It would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill, in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention was made to consider the teachings of Wang with the teachings of Aly in view of Bayk to make system more standardized. Having a mechanism wherein having included in a header of the second packet a second header verification code generated from a header of the second packet but not a payload of the second packet; and dynamically reallocating the header of the second packet to a preset location among the two or more communications channels; more standardized approach can be carried out in the communication system.
Regarding claim 12, Aly in view of Bayk teaches as per claim 11, but fails to teach about wherein the first device is configured to perform the data communication by: performing, in response to detecting verification of a header of the second packet and verification of a payload of the second packet, data communication of an third packet over the subset of the two or more communications channels; however Wang teaches… generating a message header and message content according to a message to be sent, wherein the message header comprises message length information and a source node serial number of the sent message, and the message content is represented in a message key-message value pair form; generating a verification code vector based on the message header and message content and the key list; and forming a sending message packet by the message header, the message content and the verification code vector, and sending the sending message packet. The receiving method adopts a key list corresponding to the receiving node to verify the received message and stores the message passing the verification in a hash table of a system memory. It would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill, in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention was made to consider the teachings of Wang with the teachings of Aly in view of Bayk to make system more standardized. Having a mechanism about detecting verification of a header of the second packet and verification of a payload of the second packet, data communication of an third packet over the subset of the two or more communications channels; more standardized approach can be carried out in the communication system.
Regarding claim 17, Aly in view of Bayk teaches as per claim 16, but fails to teach about wherein performing the data communication further includes::
including in a header of the second packet a second header verification code generated from a header of the second packet but not a payload of the second packet; and
dynamically reallocating the header of the second packet to a preset location among the two or more communications channels; however Wang teaches… generating a message header and message content according to a message to be sent, wherein the message header comprises message length information and a source node serial number of the sent message, and the message content is represented in a message key-message value pair form; generating a verification code vector based on the message header and message content and the key list; and forming a sending message packet by the message header, the message content and the verification code vector, and sending the sending message packet. The receiving method adopts a key list corresponding to the receiving node to verify the received message and stores the message passing the verification in a hash table of a system memory. It would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill, in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention was made to consider the teachings of Wang with the teachings of Aly in view of Bayk to make system more standardized. Having a mechanism wherein the data communication circuitry is configured to perform the data communication by:
including in a header of the second packet a second header verification code generated from a header of the second packet but not a payload of the second packet; and
dynamically reallocating the header of the second packet to a preset location among the two or more communications channels; more standardized approach can be carried out in the communication system.
Claim(s) 6, 13 and 19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Aly et al. (US Pub. No. 2023/0276428 A1) in view of Baykas et al. (US Pub. No. 2024/0204965 A1), hereafter Bayk and in further view of Kim et al. (US Pub. No. 2025/0330475 A1).
Regarding claim 6, Aly in view of Bayk teaches as per claim 1, but fails to teach about, wherein the data communication circuitry is further configured to:
provision one or more spare lanes including one or more unallocated communications channels of the two or more communications channels; and
allocate at least one of the one or more unallocated communications channels to the subset of the two or more communications channels; however Kim states in [0041] regarding when an operational error is detected in any one of the proxy gateways, the access synchronization module may change and allocate an unoccupied data channel of a normally operating proxy gateway to users to whom a data channel of the proxy gateway from which the error is detected is allocated; now refer to [0042] ..the access synchronization module may allocate one or more of unoccupied data channels of the gateways as a spare channel according to a security level of the user among users to whom the data channels of the gateways are allocated; further see [0131- 0134]. It would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill, in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention was made to consider the teachings of Kim with the teachings of Aly in view of Bayk to make system more effective. Having a mechanism wherein the data communication circuitry is further configured to: provision one or more spare lanes including one or more unallocated communications channels of the two or more communications channels; and allocate at least one of the one or more unallocated communications channels to the subset of the two or more communications channels; greater way resources can be allocated/managed in the communication system.
Regarding claim 13, Aly in view of Bayk teaches as per claim 8, but fails to teach about, wherein the first device is further configured to: provision one or more spare lanes including one or more unallocated communications channels of the two or more communications channels; and allocate at least one of the one or more unallocated communications channels to the subset of the two or more communications channels; however Kim states in [0041] regarding when an operational error is detected in any one of the proxy gateways, the access synchronization module may change and allocate an unoccupied data channel of a normally operating proxy gateway to users to whom a data channel of the proxy gateway from which the error is detected is allocated; now refer to [0042] ..the access synchronization module may allocate one or more of unoccupied data channels of the gateways as a spare channel according to a security level of the user among users to whom the data channels of the gateways are allocated; further see [0131- 0134]. It would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill, in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention was made to consider the teachings of Kim with the teachings of Aly in view of Bayk to make system more effective. Having a mechanism wherein to provision one or more spare lanes including one or more unallocated communications channels of the two or more communications channels; and allocate at least one of the one or more unallocated communications channels to the subset of the two or more communications channels; greater way resources can be allocated/managed in the communication system.
Regarding claim 19, Aly in view of Bayk teaches as per claim 15, but fails to teach about, wherein performing the data communication further includes: provisioning one or more spare lanes including one or more unallocated communications channels of the two or more communications channels; and allocating at least one of the one or more unallocated communications channels to the subset of the two or more communications channels; however Kim states in [0041] regarding when an operational error is detected in any one of the proxy gateways, the access synchronization module may change and allocate an unoccupied data channel of a normally operating proxy gateway to users to whom a data channel of the proxy gateway from which the error is detected is allocated; now refer to [0042] ..the access synchronization module may allocate one or more of unoccupied data channels of the gateways as a spare channel according to a security level of the user among users to whom the data channels of the gateways are allocated; further see [0131- 0134]. It would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill, in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention was made to consider the teachings of Kim with the teachings of Aly in view of Bayk to make system more effective. Having a mechanism wherein provisioning one or more spare lanes including one or more unallocated communications channels of the two or more communications channels; and allocating at least one of the one or more unallocated communications channels to the subset of the two or more communications channels; greater way resources can be allocated/managed in the communication system.
Claim(s) 7, 14 and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Aly et al. (US Pub. No. 2023/0276428 A1) in view of Baykas et al. (US Pub. No. 2024/0204965 A1), hereafter Bayk and in further view of Saito (US Pat. No. 6563796 B1).
Regarding claim 7, Aly in view of Bayk teaches as per claim 1, but Aly is silent about wherein the data communication circuitry is configured to perform the data communication by: omitting from a payload of the second packet one or more parts of a payload of the first packet, wherein the one or more parts omitted from the payload of the second packet correspond to one or more communication channels excluded from the subset of the two or more communications channels; including in a header of the second packet an indication of one or more locations of the one or more parts omitted from the payload of the second packet, an additional indication of a length of the second packet, and a second header verification code generated from the header of the second packet but not the payload of the second packet; and including in the second packet a packet verification code generated from at least the payload of the second packet; however Saito teaches in col. 14 lines 19- 31 about ... In the packet arrival detection section 1020, payload is removed and header information other than the packet length information written in a certain location (depending on the packet format) is removed and a timestamp (i.e. indication of the location) in attached. Packet length information and timestamp thus obtained for each packet are read out by CPU 1021. Using this information, CPU 1021 performs quality evaluation of the traffic in the lines 1008, 1009. It would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill, in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention was made to consider the teachings of Saito with the teachings of Aly in view of Bayk to make system more standardized.
Regarding claim 14, Aly in view of Bayk teaches as per claim 8, but Aly is silent about wherein the first device is configured to perform the data communication by: omitting from a payload of the second packet one or more parts of a payload of the first packet, wherein the one or more parts omitted from the payload of the second packet correspond to one or more communication channels excluded from the subset of the two or more communications channels; including in a header of the second packet an indication of one or more locations of the one or more parts omitted from the payload of the second packet, an additional indication of a length of the second packet, and a second header verification code generated from the header of the second packet but not the payload of the second packet; and including in the second packet a packet verification code generated from at least the payload of the second packet; however Saito teaches in col. 14 lines 19- 31 about ... In the packet arrival detection section 1020, payload is removed and header information other than the packet length information written in a certain location (depending on the packet format) is removed and a timestamp (i.e. indication of the location) in attached. Packet length information and timestamp thus obtained for each packet are read out by CPU 1021. Using this information, CPU 1021 performs quality evaluation of the traffic in the lines 1008, 1009. It would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill, in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention was made to consider the teachings of Saito with the teachings of Aly in view of Bayk to make system more standardized.
Regarding claim 20, Aly in view of Bayk teaches as per claim 15, but Aly is silent about wherein performing the data communication includes: omitting from a payload of the second packet one or more parts of a payload of the first packet, wherein the one or more parts omitted from the payload of the second packet correspond to one or more communication channels excluded from the subset of the two or more communications channels; including in a header of the second packet an indication of one or more locations of the one or more parts omitted from the payload of the second packet, an additional indication of a length of the second packet, and a second header verification code generated from the header of the second packet but not the payload of the second packet; and including in the second packet a packet verification code generated from at least the payload of the second packet; however Saito teaches in col. 14 lines 19- 31 about ... In the packet arrival detection section 1020, payload is removed and header information other than the packet length information written in a certain location (depending on the packet format) is removed and a timestamp (i.e. indication of the location) in attached. Packet length information and timestamp thus obtained for each packet are read out by CPU 1021. Using this information, CPU 1021 performs quality evaluation of the traffic in the lines 1008, 1009. It would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill, in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention was made to consider the teachings of Saito with the teachings of Aly in view of Bayk to make system more standardized.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Please see PTO-892 form for considered prior arts for record.
Reference Licardie et al. (US Pub. No. 2019/0356580 A1) teaches about local transceiver system for resilient data communications over a virtual channel with a remote transceiver system, comprising: a data access card comprising: at least one port configured to receive a group of one or more data frames to be transmitted across a first wireless link and a second wireless link to the remote transceiver system; a header insertion circuit configured to attach one or more headers to the group of one or more data frames, each header including synchronization information to support re-assembly, each header further including receive status information configured to inform the remote transceiver system of a receive status of each of the first wireless link and the second wireless link as previously determined by the local transceiver system; a segmentation circuit configured to segment, at a physical layer, the group of one or more data frames with the one or more headers into one or more data frame group segments; a failure detection circuit configured to individually detect, at the physical layer, any link failure of the first wireless link or the second wireless link; and a switch configured to distribute a first set of the one or more data frame group segments to be transmitted across the first wireless link to the remote transceiver system and to distribute a second set of the one or more data frame group segments to be transmitted across the second wireless link to the remote transceiver system when neither the first wireless link nor the second wireless link has been identified as failed, and configured to distribute the one or more data frame group segments away from a particular one of the first wireless link or the second wireless link when the particular one of the first wireless link or the second wireless link has been identified as failed, thereby rendering the data communications over the virtual channel with the remote transceiver system resilient to the link failure, the switch being controlled by configuration information; and a circuit configured to manage the configuration information of the switch.; see claim 1.
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. 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 PARTH PATEL whose telephone number is (571)270-1970. The examiner can normally be reached 7 a.m. -7 p.m. PST.
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, Jae Y. Lee can be reached at 5712703936. 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.
PARTH PATEL
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 2479
/PARTH PATEL/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2479
Prosecution Insights