CTNF 18/634,820 CTNF 83071 DETAILED ACTION This communication is in response to Application No. 18/634,820 filed on 4/12/2024. The amendment presented on 5/7/2026, which cancels claims 11-19, amends claims 6, 10, 25, and 29, and adds new claims 31-39, is hereby acknowledged. Claims 1-10 and 20-39 have been examined. Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status 07-03-aia AIA 15-10-aia The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA. Election/Restrictions 08-25-01 AIA Applicant’s election without traverse of 1-10 and 20-30 in the reply filed on 5/7/2026 is acknowledged. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112 07-30-02 AIA 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. 07-34-01 Claim 21 is 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. Claim 21 claims translating the first feedback signal to the second signal feedback signal but the parent claim 20 claims that the second feedback signal is received. Therefore, the dependent claim 21 is not consistent with the parent claim 20. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103 07-20-aia AIA 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. 07-21-aia AIA Claim s 1, 3-5, 7-9, 20, 24, 26-27, 30-31, 33-35, and 37-38 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Dudda et al. (hereinafter Dudda)(US 2019/0356425) . Regarding claims 1 and 31, Dudda teaches as follows: A user equipment (UE)(interpreted as the receiving station 550 in figures 5-8) for wireless communication (the UE (as the station 500 or 550 ) may be configured by means of control signaling to apply the technique, see, ¶ [0134]), comprising: one or more memories (556 in figure 8); and one or more processors (554 in figure 8), coupled to the one or more memories (the receiving station 550 comprises a radio interface 552 for radio communication with a transmitting station, one or more processor circuits 554 for performing the method 300 and memory 556 coupled to the processor circuits 554. The memory 556 is encoded with instructions that implement each of the modules 102, 104 and 106, see, ¶ [0139] and figure 8), configured to cause the UE to: transmit, to a network node (interpreted as the transmitting station 500 in figures 5-7)), a first feedback signal (different data is transmitted in the step 402 on the HARQ processes 530 and 532. If one of the HARQ transmissions 530-580 and 532-582 is not successful, NACK is sent on both HARQ processes 580 and 582 as the feedbacks 596 and 598 in the step 306. Only if both HARQ transmissions 530-580 and 532-582 are successfully received (e.g., successfully decoded), ACK is sent on both HARQ processes 580 and 582 as the feedbacks 596 and 598 in the step 306, see, ¶ [0091] and figure 6) via a physical (PHY) layer indication (the protocol stack of the receiving station 550 comprises a network layer 560, a data link layer 570 and a physical layer 590, see, ¶ [0085]. Therefore, the feedbacks 596 and 598 are inherently transmitted to the transmitting station 500 via the physical layer 590); and transmit, to the network node, a second feedback signal (interpreted as the radio link control (RLC) status report) via the PHY layer indication (the feedback may be indicative of the logically combined results, e.g., in at least one of a HARQ feedback and a Radio Link Control (RLC) feedback, e.g., an RLC status report, see, ¶ [0023])(the third embodiment of FIG. 7 uses LTE status reports exchanged between the RLC layers 524 and 574 for implementing the feedbacks 596 and 598, see, ¶ [0102] and figure 7) (the protocol stack of the receiving station 550 comprises a network layer 560, a data link layer 570 and a physical layer 590, see, ¶ [0085]. Therefore, the feedbacks 596 and 598 are inherently transmitted to the transmitting station 500 via the physical layer 590), wherein the second feedback signal is associated with radio link control (RLC) packet loss (a retransmission according to the ARQ operation of the RLC layer 574 may be triggered by including the NACK in the status report for the received RLC PDUs (equivalent to applicant’s RLC packet loss), see, ¶ [0107]). Dudda teaches the first feedback signal (HARQ feedback) and the second feedback signal (RLC feedback) in different embodiments. 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 Dudda to include using multiple types of feedbacks together in order to efficiently improve feedback reliability. Regarding claims 3, 24, and 33, Dudda teaches as follows: Wherein the first feedback signal includes hybrid automatic repeat request feedback (the second embodiment of FIG. 6 uses LTE HARQ feedbacks of the MAC layers 526 and 576 for implementing the feedbacks 596 and 598, see, ¶ [0099] and figure 6). Regarding claims 4 and 34, Dudda teaches as follows: Wherein the second feedback signal includes a negative acknowledgement signal (a retransmission according to the ARQ operation of the RLC layer 574 may be triggered by including the NACK in the status report for the received RLC PDUs, see, ¶ [0107]). Regarding claims 5 and 35, Dudda teaches as follows: Wherein the second feedback signal is associated with a transport block (the error detection scheme performed by the device 100 at the receiving station 550 in the step 304 is based on the CRC values in the received transport blocks 592 and 594 . The received transport blocks 592 and 594 are uniquely associated with the HARQ processes 580 and 582, respectively. Each of the received transport blocks 592 and 594 includes a CRC value. The error detection scheme is independently performed for each of the received transport blocks 592 and 594, see, ¶ [0098] and figure 7). Regarding claims 7, 26, 30, and 37, Dudda teaches as follows: Wherein the one or more processors are further configured to cause the UE to receive a request for the second feedback signal (interpreted as the hybrid automatic repeat request (HARQ))(for the device 100 at the receiving station 550, the substep 589 of combining the CRC results 585 and 587 and the optional substep 581 of comparing the data received in the redundantly coupled HARQ processes 580 and 582 are implemented in the PHY layer 590 or MAC layer 576 and reported to the RLC layer 576, see, ¶ [0103] and figure 7). Regarding claim 8, Dudda teaches as follows: Wherein the request for the second feedback signal is received via downlink control information (the UE (as the station 500 or 550) may be configured by means of control signaling to apply the technique. The control signaling may be indicative of a configuration for the technique. The configuration may define at least one of the HARQ processes (equivalent to applicant’s request for feedback) that are coupled… The configuration can be provided by the eNB to the UE with RRC signaling or by means of MAC-level signaling, i.e. scheduling commands (e.g. in Downlink Control Information, DCI , and/or on a Physical Downlink Control Channel, PDCCH), see, ¶ [0134]-[0135]). Regarding claim 9, Dudda teaches as follows: Wherein the request indicates a subset of transport blocks (the data reception 302 in the HARQ processes 580 and 582 is based on received transport blocks 592 and 594 , respectively… The received transport blocks 592 and 594 are uniquely associated with the HARQ processes 580 and 582, respectively, see, ¶ [0098]). Regarding claims 20 and 27, Dudda teaches similar limitations as presented above and further teaches as follows: A network node (interpreted as the transmitting station 500 in figure 9) for wireless communication, comprising: one or more memories 506 in figure 9); and one or more processors (504 in figure 9), coupled to the one or more memories (the transmitting station 500 comprises a radio interface 502 for radio communication with a receiving station, one or more processor circuits 504 for performing the method 400 and memory 506 coupled to the processor circuits 504. The memory 506 is encoded with instructions that implement each of the modules 202, 204 and 206, see, ¶ [0141] and figure 9). Therefore, they are rejected for similar reason as presented above. Regarding claim 38, Dudda teaches similar limitation as presented above in the rejection for claims 8 and 9 . 07-21-aia AIA Claim s 2, 21-23, 28, and 32 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Dudda et al. (hereinafter Dudda)(US 2019/0356425) in view of Zhou et al. (hereinafter Zhou)(US 2020/0373991) . Regarding claims 2, 23, and 32, Dudda teaches all limitations as presented above except for the feedback signal including bits for a cyclic redundancy check. Zhou teaches as follows: Reliability of acknowledgment feedback transmission may be enhanced by providing that such acknowledgment feedback is transmitted with a CRC regardless of a payload size of the acknowledgment feedback , which may reduce instances of a receiving device incorrectly decoding an ACK as a NACK (see, ¶ [0157]) 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 Dudda with Zhou to include the acknowledgment feedback transmitted with a CRC a as taught by Zhou in order to efficiently reduce instances of a receiving device incorrectly decoding an ACK as a NACK. Regarding claim 21, Dudda teaches as follows: A protocol stack of the radio communication may include at least one of a physical layer (PHY layer), a Medium Access Control (MAC) layer and a Radio Link Control (RLC) layer. The method may be implemented (e.g., partly or completely) on the PHY layer, the MAC layer and/or the RLC layer. For example, the error detection scheme may be performed on the PHY layer and/or the MAC layer based on a Cyclic Redundancy Check (CRC) value protecting a Protocol Data Unit (PDU) including (e.g., partly or completely) the data. The logical combination of the results may be performed on, or reported to, the MAC layer and/or the RLC layer, e.g., by the same RLC entity for all of the coupled HARQ processes (see, ¶ [0016]). Dudda does not explicitly teach processing the received feedback signal between different layers. Zhou teaches of processing received feedback as presented above. 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 Dudda in view of Zhou to include translating a feedback signal between different layers in order to efficiently communicate between multiple layers. Regarding claims 22 and 28, Dudda teaches as follows: The retransmission may be a HARQ retransmission or an RLC retransmission. For example, the HARQ retransmission may be requested by sending the NACK as the feedback for each of the coupled HARQ processes according to the logical combination. Receiving one or some of the NACK feedbacks as erroneous ACK may still trigger the HARQ retransmission. Thus, the HARQ retransmission may be received before the reordering timer at the RLC layer expires, which avoids latency due to involvement of higher layers, e.g., due to an RLC retransmission (see, ¶ [0029]). Zhou teaches of detecting an error on the feedback using a CRC as presented above. Therefore, they are rejected for similar reason as presented above . 07-21-aia AIA Claim s 6, 25, 29, and 36 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Dudda et al. (hereinafter Dudda)(US 2019/0356425) in view of Leith (US 2015/0085648) . Regarding claims 6, 25, 29, and 36, Dudda teaches all limitations as presented above except for monitoring a number of unacknowledged packets associated with a threshold number. Leith teaches as follows: The processor is operated to determine whether a congestion event has occurred by monitoring a number of unacknowledged packets that have been transmitted over the network path. A congestion event may then be determined if the number of unacknowledged packets transmitted is greater than a threshold number (see, ¶ [0131]). 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 Dudda with Leith to include monitoring a number of unacknowledged packets transmitted greater than a threshold number as taught by Leith in order to efficiently trigger a feedback signal due to a detected congestion event . 07-21-aia AIA Claim s 10 and 39 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Dudda et al. (hereinafter Dudda)(US 2019/0356425) in view of Zhuo et al. (hereinafter Zhuo)(US 2024/0381163) . Regarding claims 10 and 39, Dudda teaches all limitations as presented above except for the condition triggering the feedback signal. Zhuo teaches as follows: Wherein the second feedback signal is transmitted as a result of determining that a buffer size exceeds a threshold (the feedback may be sent proactively, for instance, when the buffer load exceeds a certain threshold, see, ¶ [0070]). 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 Dudda with Zhuo to include the feedback triggering condition of buffer load size as taught by Zhuo in order to efficiently prevent packet loss due to a limited buffer size. Conclusion 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 June 11, 2026 Application/Control Number: 18/634,820 Page 2 Art Unit: 2454 Application/Control Number: 18/634,820 Page 3 Art Unit: 2454 Application/Control Number: 18/634,820 Page 4 Art Unit: 2454 Application/Control Number: 18/634,820 Page 5 Art Unit: 2454 Application/Control Number: 18/634,820 Page 6 Art Unit: 2454 Application/Control Number: 18/634,820 Page 7 Art Unit: 2454 Application/Control Number: 18/634,820 Page 8 Art Unit: 2454 Application/Control Number: 18/634,820 Page 10 Art Unit: 2454 Application/Control Number: 18/634,820 Page 11 Art Unit: 2454
Prosecution Insights