DETAILED ACTION
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 .
Summary
This action is in reply to Applicant’s Amendments and Remarks filed on 07/20/2026.
Claims 1-20 are pending.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments filed on 07/20/2026 with respect to claims 1-20 have been considered but they are not persuasive.
The Applicant presented argument that M1 (Majkowski) and A1 (Al-Maqri) fail to teach or suggest "initiating a first transmit opportunity (TXOP) to perform an uplink transmission to an access point (AP) wireless device, wherein the uplink transmission comprises an indication of a duration of a second TXOP" as recited in amended claim 1. (REMARKS, Page 1)
The Examiner respectfully disagrees and presents that MAJKOWSKI discloses -
Page 1 Section 1.
In this paper, we evaluate the performance enhancement achieved by using the transmission opportunity (TXOP) scheme, which modifies the standard transmission procedure
by allowing multiple packet transmission on single channel access. Accordingly, a station is allowed to send a number of consecutive packets limited by the duration of allocated TXOP.
Page 2 Section 2.
TXOP - Transmission opportunity duration that specify a maximum time a station can designate on packet exchange. Thus, the larger TXOP duration the greater channel occupation possible.
Page 2, Section 3:
The principle of TXOP bursting is to allow, for the station that won the
Pages 2 Section 4, Right Column Last Paragraph – Page 3 Left Column Paragraph 4:
In order to satisfy QoS requirements of each flow it is vital to assure adequate values of access parameters of the AP. Accordingly for each AC, the developed dynamic TXOP limit adjustment algorithm varies the burst duration based on the average number of packets allocated in AP queues (one queue per AC is assumed).
PNG
media_image1.png
200
400
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Pq_ Length - is the average packet length computed as the time needed for MSDU transmission over physical layer used,
N - is an average number of packets in a queue;
….. in some congestion situations TXOP duration could reach very high limits allowing packets from some AC to occupy entire channel bandwidth. Hence to limit the maximum TXOP value we can restrict it to:
….
• the value obtained when a given collision probability is achieved and hence obtain the optimum TXOP assignment for a given conditions.
The above algorithm was implemented in a software simulator in the following way. To obtain the average number of packets in a queue, the AP estimates it by means of equations (3) and (4):
See Eq. (3) and Eq. (4).
estimated_ sizen = estimated_ sizen-1 + actual_ q _ size (3)
where:
estimated_size - is an estimation based on its previous value and actual queue size calculated with every packet arrival to corresponding transmission queue,
n - is an arrived packet's index,
actual_ q_ size - is an actual size of a queue to which packet arrives including this packet
PNG
media_image2.png
200
400
media_image2.png
Greyscale
n total - a the total number of arrived packets to corresponding transmission queue during estimation interval,
N - the average number of packets in a queue estimated every beacon interval, in our case every 100 ms.
Page 3 Right Column Last Paragraph:
… TXOP parameter is updated every beacon interval (l00ms).
Page 4 Section 5.2, Right Column Last Paragraph:
Accordingly to what has been previously mentioned, due to the delay introduced by packets from interactive stations (with the slowest link), the number of packets in queues augments in comparison to the non-saturation case, see Figure 6. …. Achieved gain is due to the greater and more flexible size of TXOP bursts that are beneficial in situation when some congestion occurred.
In the above, MAJKOWSKI disclosing dynamically adjustable/flexible TXOPs parameters at every beacon interval, teaching multiple or at least first and second TXOPs with different durations, based on an indication by station/wireless device through packet transmission and resulting indication by augmented queue and/or collision probability to AP/HC provides an updated estimated queue size corresponding to the packet Access Category (AC) for next Beacon which provides a dynamically adjusted parameter for next TxOP, which is equivalent to stations or UE providing a desired duration for the second TXOP by packet transmission during first TXOP, which is then controlled by HC for actual flexibly updated duration limit for the second TXOP based on estimated queue size.
Accordingly claim 1, and similarly claims 7 and 13 are rejected.
Dependent claims 2-4, 8-12, 14-17 and 20 being dependent on claims 1, 7 and 13 are also rejected for the same reason as above.
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 of this title, 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 1-4, 7-11, 13-17 and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Majkowski et al. (“Dynamic TXOP configuration for Qos enhancement in IEEE 802.11 e wireless LAN”, of IDS, hereinafter ‘MAJKOWSKI) in view of Al-Maqri et al. (“Adaptive TXOP Assignment for QoS Support of Video Traffic in IEEE 802.11 e Networks”, of IDS, hereinafter ‘AL-MAQRI’).
Regarding claim 1, MAJKOWSKI teaches a method (
Page 2, Section 2, Left Column:
(according to a scheduler defined in HC), normally located in AP,….
Page 2, Section 3:
The principle of TXOP bursting is to allow, for the station that won then channel access, the transmission of multiple packets. This mechanism is characterised by two parameters: the start time and the duration. The duration parameter specifies the time that the station could devote to the packet exchange sequence, including data packet and its corresponding acknowledgement. Both parameters start time and duration depend on the access mode: HCCA or EDCA. Within controlled medium access HCCA mode start time and duration of TXOP limit are managed by HC that schedules poll message to a station for starting burst transmission and specifies its duration. In contention based mode, EDCA, the maximum size of the burst is also controlled by HC. However, by default, the maximum burst size has a constant value, which is obtained by each station from a QoS parameter set element allocated in the beacon frame. Since EDCA mode is contention based, the burst start time is defined by backoff algorithm executed independently at each station. In addition, during TXOP period only packets from the same AC are sent and successive packets are separated by SIFS interval. Since SIFS interval is used for packet separation, the other stations cannot gain channel access as they have to wait at least DIPS interval. The station ends its TXOP burst in three cases: if it does not have more packets within the winning AC, if there is not enough free space for the next packet exchange (QoS Data --,- ACK) or if packet transmission fails.), comprising:
by a wireless device (Page 2, Section 3, Station):
initiating a first transmit opportunity (TXOP) to perform an uplink transmission to an access point (AP) wireless device (
Page 2, Section 3:
The principle of TXOP bursting is to allow, for the station that won then channel access, the transmission of multiple packets ….. managed by HC that schedules poll message to a station for starting burst transmission and specifies its duration), wherein the uplink transmission includes an indication of a desired duration for the second TXOP (
Page 1 Section 1.
In this paper, we evaluate the performance enhancement achieved by using the transmission opportunity (TXOP) scheme, which modifies the standard transmission procedure
by allowing multiple packet transmission on single channel access. Accordingly, a station is allowed to send a number of consecutive packets limited by the duration of allocated TXOP.
Page 2 Section 2.
TXOP - Transmission opportunity duration that specify a maximum time a station can designate on packet exchange. Thus, the larger TXOP duration the greater channel occupation possible.
Page 2, Section 3:
The principle of TXOP bursting is to allow, for the station that won the
Pages 2 Section 4, Right Column Last Paragraph – Page 3 Left Column Paragraph 4:
In order to satisfy QoS requirements of each flow it is vital to assure adequate values of access parameters of the AP. Accordingly for each AC, the developed dynamic TXOP limit adjustment algorithm varies the burst duration based on the average number of packets allocated in AP queues (one queue per AC is assumed).
PNG
media_image1.png
200
400
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Pq_ Length - is the average packet length computed as the time needed for MSDU transmission over physical layer used,
N - is an average number of packets in a queue;
….. in some congestion situations TXOP duration could reach very high limits allowing packets from some AC to occupy entire channel bandwidth. Hence to limit the maximum TXOP value we can restrict it to:
….
• the value obtained when a given collision probability is achieved and hence obtain the optimum TXOP assignment for a given conditions.
The above algorithm was implemented in a software simulator in the following way. To obtain the average number of packets in a queue, the AP estimates it by means of equations (3) and (4):
See Eq. (3) and Eq. (4).
estimated_ sizen = estimated_ sizen-1 + actual_ q _ size (3)
where:
estimated_size - is an estimation based on its previous value and actual queue size calculated with every packet arrival to corresponding transmission queue,
n - is an arrived packet's index,
actual_ q_ size - is an actual size of a queue to which packet arrives including this packet
PNG
media_image2.png
200
400
media_image2.png
Greyscale
n total - a the total number of arrived packets to corresponding transmission queue during estimation interval,
N - the average number of packets in a queue estimated every beacon interval, in our case every 100 ms.
Page 3 Right Column Last Paragraph:
… TXOP parameter is updated every beacon interval (l00ms).
Page 4 Section 5.2, Right Column Last Paragraph:
Accordingly to what has been previously mentioned, due to the delay introduced by packets from interactive stations (with the slowest link), the number of packets in queues augments in comparison to the non-saturation case, see Figure 6. …. Achieved gain is due to the greater and more flexible size of TXOP bursts that are beneficial in situation when some congestion occurred.
(In the above, MAJKOWSKI disclosing dynamically adjustable/flexible TXOPs parameters at every beacon interval, teaching multiple or at least first and second TXOPs with different durations, based on an indication by station/wireless device through packet transmission and resulting indication by augmented queue and/or collision probability to AP/HC provides an updated estimated queue size corresponding to the packet Access Category (AC) for next Beacon which provides a dynamically adjusted parameter for next TxOP, which is equivalent to stations or UE providing a desired duration for the second TXOP by packet transmission during first TXOP, which is then controlled by HC for actual flexibly updated duration limit for the second TXOP based on estimated queue size.)); and
receiving, from the AP wireless device, an acknowledgement indicating whether the wireless device can initiate second TXOP wireless medium (
Page 2, Section 3:
Both parameters start time and duration depend on the access mode: HCCA or EDCA. Within controlled medium access HCCA mode start time and duration of TXOP limit are managed by HC that schedules poll message to a station for starting burst transmission and specifies its duration.
See Pages 2 Section 4, Right Column Last Paragraph:
…for each AC, the developed dynamic TXOP limit adjustment algorithm varies the burst duration ….
Page 4 Section 5.1:
Table 1 - EDC'A contention parameters
illustrating different Access Categories (ACs) with corresponding TXOPs
See also Page 4 Section 5.2, Right Column Last Paragraph:
flexible size of TXOP bursts).
MAJKOWSKI does not explicitly disclose receiving, from the AP wireless device, an acknowledgement indicating whether the wireless device can initiate the second TXOP without having to contend for a wireless medium.
In an analogous art, AL-MAQRI teaches receiving, from the AP wireless device, an acknowledgement indicating whether the wireless device can initiate the second TXOP without having to contend for a wireless medium (
Page 2, Section II.A Left Column:
Fig. 1 demonstrate the superframe which includes Contention Free Period (CFP) followed by Contention Period (CP).
Fig. 1. Controlled Channel Access Mechanism in IEEE 802.11e HCCA
Illustrating Contention Free TXOP1…TXOP3
Page 2, Section II.B Left Column – Right Column Last Paragraph:
As mentioned earlier, the QoS-enabled station (QSTA) issues a QoS reservation through transmitting an ADDTSRequest frame. This frame carries information about the TS characteristics (TSPEC) which is required by HC for scheduling purpose. The mandatory fields of the TSPEC are described as follows:
……
Service Interval (SI): the time interval between TXOPs of the station in units of milliseconds.
The HC which usually resides in the QoS-enabled Access Point (QAP) maintains these
2) TXOP Allocation: HC allocates different TXOP to each admitted QSTA so as to transmit their data with respect to the negotiated QoS parameters of the TSPEC. This TXOP is calculated for each station ....
3) Admission Control: The ACLJ manages the TSs admission while maintaining the QoS of the already admitted ones. When a new TS demands an admission, the ACU First obtains a new SI as shown in the previous step and calculates the number of MSDUs expected to arrive at the new SI using Equation (3}. Then it calculates the TXOP; for the particular TS using Equation (4). Finally, ACU only admits the TS if the following inequality satisfied.
PNG
media_image3.png
200
400
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Page 3 Section III. A.
2) Mean Size of MSDU (L;): the HC updates L; in Equation ( 4) with regards to the information piggybacked with each packet received from a QSTA. In fact, this is the major part of the proposed mechanism in which the TXOP duration given to a QSTA is calculated dynamically to accommodate the actual packet size to be received at the QAP.
B.
Adaptive TXOP assignment. This information is transmitted with each packet to the QAP carrying the next frame size. Upon each data frame reception, the HC recalculates the TXOP duration to be granted for the specific station in the next S1 so as to adapt to the fast varying in VBR video traffic.
See also Page 4, Section III.B
2) Operation at the access point: After the traffic setup phase, the QAP transmits the first poll frame granting the QSTA a TXOP duration. The station will accordingly transmit the first packet of its traffic to the QAP.
TXOPi in Eq (6).
Page 4 Section IV A, Right Column Paragraph 3:
Since we focus on HCCA performance measurement, all the stations operate only on the contention-free mode by setting Tep in Equation (5) to zero).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to take the technique of Adaptive TXOP Assignment for QoS Support in IEEE 802.11e Networks of AL-MAQRI to the system of Dynamic TXOP configuration for Qos enhancement in IEEE 802.lle wireless LAN of MAJKOWSKI in order to take the advantage of method for an efficient allocation of TXOP scheduling traffic for QSTAs maintaining QoS (AL-MAQRI: Page 1, Section 1. INTRODUCTION).
Regarding claim 2, MAJKOWSKI, in view of AL-MAQRI, teaches the method of claim 1.
MAJKOWSKI does not explicitly disclose wherein the uplink transmission includes an indication of whether initiating a second TXOP without wireless medium contention is requested by the wireless device.
AL-MAQRI teaches wherein the uplink transmission includes an indication of whether initiating a second TXOP without wireless medium contention is requested by the wireless device (
Page 2, Section II.B
the QoS-enabled station (QSTA), issues a QoS reservation through transmitting an ADDTSRequest frame.
…. each QSTA to transmit its traffics (TXOP)…).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to take the technique of Adaptive TXOP Assignment for QoS Support in IEEE 802.11e Networks of AL-MAQRI to the system of Dynamic TXOP configuration for Qos enhancement in IEEE 802.lle wireless LAN of MAJKOWSKI in order to take the advantage of method for an efficient allocation of TXOP scheduling traffic for QSTAs maintaining QoS (AL-MAQRI: Page 1, Section 1. INTRODUCTION).
Regarding claim 3, MAJKOWSKI, in view of AL-MAQRI, teaches the method of claim 1,
MAJKOWSKI does not explicitly disclose wherein without having to contend for the wireless medium comprises the wireless device transmitting without initiating a contention process before initiating the second TXOP.
AL-MAQRI teaches wherein without having to contend for the wireless medium comprises the wireless device transmitting without initiating a contention process before initiating the second TXOP (
Page 2, Section II.A Left Column:
Fig. 1 demonstrate the superframe which includes Contention Free Period (CFP) followed by Contention Period (CP).
Fig. 1. Controlled Channel Access Mechanism in IEEE 802.11e HCCA
Illustrating Contention Free TXOP1…TXOP3
Page 2, Section II.B
the QoS-enabled station (QSTA), issues a QoS reservation through transmitting an ADDTSRequest frame.
…. each QSTA to transmit its traffics (TXOP)…).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to take the technique of Adaptive TXOP Assignment for QoS Support in IEEE 802.11e Networks of AL-MAQRI to the system of Dynamic TXOP configuration for Qos enhancement in IEEE 802.lle wireless LAN of MAJKOWSKI in order to take the advantage of method for an efficient allocation of TXOP scheduling traffic for QSTAs maintaining QoS (AL-MAQRI: Page 1, Section 1. INTRODUCTION).
Regarding claim 4, MAJKOWSKI, in view of AL-MAQRI, teaches the method of claim 1,
wherein the acknowledgement includes an indication of an allowed duration for the second TXOP (
Page 2, Section 3:
The principle of TXOP bursting is to allow, for the station that won then channel access, the transmission of multiple packets. This mechanism is characterised by two parameters: the start time and the duration. …… Within controlled medium access HCCA mode start time and duration of TXOP limit are managed by HC …..
See also AL_MAQRI:
Page 2, Section II.B
…If HC accepts the traffic it will respond by an ADDTS-Response …..
2) TXOP Allocation: HC allocates different TXOP to each admitted QSTA so as to transmit their data with respect to the negotiated QoS parameters of the TSPEC….
Then the TXOP duration of the particular station, TXOP is calculated ….).
Regarding claim 7, MAJKOWSKI teaches an apparatus, comprising:
a processor configured to cause a first wireless device (Page 2, Section 3, Station) to.
Further claim 7 is interpreted mutatis mutandis of claim 1, and rejected for the same reason as set forth for claim 1.
Regarding claim 8, MAJKOWSKI, in view of AL-MAQRI teaches the apparatus of claim 7,
wherein the processor is further configured to cause the first wireless device to:
receive an indication of a TXOP duration limit from the second wireless device (
Page 2, Section 3:
The principle of TXOP bursting is to allow, for the station that won then channel access, the transmission of multiple packets. This mechanism is characterised by two parameters: the start time and the duration. …… Within controlled medium access HCCA mode start time and duration of TXOP limit are managed by HC …..
See also AL_MAQRI:
Page 2, Section II.B
…If HC accepts the traffic it will respond by an ADDTS-Response …..
2) TXOP Allocation: HC allocates different TXOP to each admitted QSTA so as to transmit their data with respect to the negotiated QoS parameters of the TSPEC….
Then the TXOP duration of the particular station, TXOP is calculated ….).
MAJKOWSKI does not explicitly disclose wherein without having to contend for the wireless medium comprises the wireless device transmitting without initiating a contention process before initiating the second TXOP,
wherein the desired duration for the second TXOP is longer than the TXOP duration limit (
although MAJKOWSKI discloses (Page 2 Section 4)
Accordingly for each AC, the developed dynamic TXOP limit adjustment algorithm varies the burst duration based on the average number of packets allocated in AP queues (one queue per AC is assumed).).
AL-MAQRI teaches wherein without having to contend for the wireless medium comprises the wireless device transmitting without initiating a contention process before initiating the second TXOP (
Page 2, Section II.A Left Column:
Fig. 1 demonstrate the superframe which includes Contention Free Period (CFP) followed by Contention Period (CP).
Fig. 1. Controlled Channel Access Mechanism in IEEE 802.11e HCCA
Illustrating Contention Free TXOP1…TXOP3
Page 2, Section II.B
the QoS-enabled station (QSTA), issues a QoS reservation through transmitting an ADDTSRequest frame.
…. each QSTA to transmit its traffics (TXOP)…),
wherein the desired duration for the second TXOP is longer than the TXOP duration limit (
Page 3 Section III. A.
2) Mean Size of MSDU (L;): the HC updates L; in Equation ( 4) with regards to the information piggybacked with each packet received from a QSTA. In fact, this is the major part of the proposed mechanism in which the TXOP duration given to a QSTA is calculated dynamically to accommodate the actual packet size to be received at the QAP.
B.
Adaptive TXOP assignment. This information is transmitted with each packet to the QAP carrying the next frame size. Upon each data frame reception, the HC recalculates the TXOP duration to be granted for the specific station in the next S1 so as to adapt to the fast varying in VBR video traffic.
See also Page 4, TXOPi in Eq (6)
(It is obvious to a person skill in the art, that next desired TXOPi duration is request during current TXOP transmission, desired TXOPi duration is indicated by the packet size which varies indicating longer, shorter or equal duration as design intend use case)).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to take the technique of Adaptive TXOP Assignment for QoS Support in IEEE 802.11e Networks of AL-MAQRI to the system of Dynamic TXOP configuration for Qos enhancement in IEEE 802.lle wireless LAN of MAJKOWSKI in order to take the advantage of method for an efficient allocation of TXOP scheduling traffic for QSTAs maintaining QoS (AL-MAQRI: Page 1, Section 1. INTRODUCTION).
Regarding claim 9, MAJKOWSKI, in view of AL-MAQRI teaches the apparatus of claim 7.
MAJKOWSKI does not explicitly disclose wherein the processor is further configured to cause the first wireless device to:
receive, from the second wireless device, a control response frame that includes an explicit indication that the first wireless device can initiate the second TXOP without wireless medium contention,
wherein determining that the first wireless device can initiate the second TXOP without wireless medium contention is based at least in part on the explicit indication that the first wireless device can initiate the second TXOP without wireless medium contention.
AL-MAQRI teaches wherein the processor is further configured to cause the first wireless device to:
receive, from the second wireless device, a control response frame that includes an explicit indication that the first wireless device can initiate the second TXOP without wireless medium contention (
Page 2, Section II.A Left Column:
Fig. 1 demonstrate the superframe which includes Contention Free Period (CFP) followed by Contention Period (CP).
Fig. 1. Controlled Channel Access Mechanism in IEEE 802.11e HCCA
Illustrating Contention Free TXOP1…TXOP3
Page 2, Section II.B
the QoS-enabled station (QSTA), issues a QoS reservation through transmitting an ADDTSRequest frame.
…. each QSTA to transmit its traffics (TXOP)…),
wherein determining that the first wireless device can initiate the second TXOP without wireless medium contention is based at least in part on the explicit indication that the first wireless device can initiate the second TXOP without wireless medium contention (
See Page 2, Fig. 1, and
Page 2, Section II.B
As mentioned earlier, the QoS-enabled station (QSTA) issues a QoS reservation through transmitting an ADDTSRequest frame. This frame carries information about the TS characteristics (TSPEC) which is required by HC for scheduling purpose. The mandatory fields of the TSPEC are described as follows:
……
Service Interval (SI): the time interval between TXOPs of the station in units of milliseconds.).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to take the technique of Adaptive TXOP Assignment for QoS Support in IEEE 802.11e Networks of AL-MAQRI to the system of Dynamic TXOP configuration for Qos enhancement in IEEE 802.lle wireless LAN of MAJKOWSKI in order to take the advantage of method for an efficient allocation of TXOP scheduling traffic for QSTAs maintaining QoS (AL-MAQRI: Page 1, Section 1. INTRODUCTION).
Regarding claim 10, MAJKOWSKI, in view of AL-MAQRI teaches the apparatus of claim 9, wherein the processor is further configured to cause the first wireless device to:
receive an indication of a TXOP duration limit from the second wireless device,
wherein the control response frame includes an indication of an allowed duration for the second TXOP (
See Page 2, Section 3 cited above for claim 9).
MAJKOWSKI does not explicitly disclose wherein the allowed duration for the second TXOP is longer than the TXOP duration limit.
AL-MAQRI teaches wherein the allowed duration for the second TXOP is longer than the TXOP duration limit (
Page 3 Section III. A.
2) Mean Size of MSDU (L;): the HC updates L; in Equation ( 4) with regards to the information piggybacked with each packet received from a QSTA. In fact, this is the major part of the proposed mechanism in which the TXOP duration given to a QSTA is calculated dynamically to accommodate the actual packet size to be received at the QAP.
B.
Adaptive TXOP assignment. This information is transmitted with each packet to the QAP carrying the next frame size. Upon each data frame reception, the HC recalculates the TXOP duration to be granted for the specific station in the next S1 so as to adapt to the fast varying in VBR video traffic.
See also Page 4, TXOPi in Eq (6).
(It is obvious to a person skill in the art, that the granted next TXOPi duration is depends on the indicated packet size which varies indicating longer, shorter or equal duration as design intend use case)).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to take the technique of Adaptive TXOP Assignment for QoS Support in IEEE 802.11e Networks of AL-MAQRI to the system of Dynamic TXOP configuration for Qos enhancement in IEEE 802.lle wireless LAN of MAJKOWSKI in order to take the advantage of method for an efficient allocation of TXOP scheduling traffic for QSTAs maintaining QoS (AL-MAQRI: Page 1, Section 1. INTRODUCTION).
Regarding claim 11, MAJKOWSKI, in view of AL-MAQRI teaches the apparatus of claim 7,
wherein the first TXOP is obtained for a first access category (
Page 1 Section 2:
The proposed enhancements are based on introduction of the Access Categories (AC) concept, with their independent backoff entities to provide service differentiation.
Pag2 Section 3:
In addition, during TXOP period only packets from the same AC are sent and successive packets are separated by SIFS interval.),
wherein the first transmission includes data associated with the first access category, wherein a second transmission performed in the second TXOP includes data associated with one or more access categories with higher priority than the first access category (
Page 2, Section 2:
AC with highest priority and AC with lowest priority.
Page 4 Section 5.1:
Table 1 - EDC'A contention parameters
illustrating different Access Categories (ACs) with corresponding TXOPs
(It is obvious the AC of second TXOP is with higher priority as design use case choice)).
Regarding claim 13, MAJKOWSKI teaches an access point (AP) wireless device, comprising: one or more antennas, a radio operably coupled to the one or more antennas, and a processor operably coupled to the radio, wherein the AP wireless device is configured to (
Page 2, Section 2:
The HCF controlled channel access mechanism uses a QoS-aware centralized coordinator, called hybrid coordinator (HC)) ….. During CFP, the channel access is managed by a polling mechanism (according to a scheduler defined in HC), normally located in AP, and based on traffic specification (TSPEC) provide by each flow [l].)
Further claim 13 is interpreted as mutatis mutandis of claim 1, and rejected for the same reason as set forth for claim 1.
Regarding claim 14, MAJKOWSKI, in view of AL-MAQEI, teaches the AP wireless device of claim 13.
MAJKOWSKI does not explicitly disclose wherein when the transmitted indication indicates that the wireless device can initiate a second TXOP without wireless medium contention, the AP wireless device is further configured to:
receive a second uplink transmission from the wireless device during the second TXOP.
AL-MAQRI teaches wherein when the transmitted indication indicates that the wireless device can initiate a second TXOP without wireless medium contention, the AP wireless device is further configured to:
receive a second uplink transmission from the wireless device during the second TXOP contention (
Page 2, Section II.A
Fig. 1. Controlled Channel Access Mechanism in IEEE 802.11e HCCA
Illustrating Contention Free TXOP1…TXOP3
Page 2, Section II.B
the QoS-enabled station (QSTA), issues a QoS reservation through transmitting an ADDTSRequest frame. This frame carries information about the TS characteristics (TSPEC) which is required by HC for scheduling purpose.
The HC which usually resides in the QoS-enabled Access Point (QAP) maintains U1eses TSPECs in so-called polling list. HC computes the duration of the time to be granted to each QSTA to transmit its traffics (TXOP). The admission of the TSs is governed by HC, using the Admission Control Unit (ACU). The HC reserves the right to accept or reject any TS so as to preserve the QoS of the previously admitted TSs. If HC accepts the traffic it will respond by an ADDTS-Response or a rejection message otherwise…..
2) TXOP Allocation: HC allocates different TXOP to each admitted QSTA so as to transmit their data with respect to the negotiated QoS parameters of the TSPEC. This TXOP is calculated for each station ....
Page 3 Section III. A.
2) Mean Size of MSDU (L;): the HC updates L; in Equation ( 4) with regards to the information piggybacked with each packet received from a QSTA. In fact, this is the major part of the proposed mechanism in which the TXOP duration given to a QSTA is calculated dynamically to accommodate the actual packet size to be received at the QAP.
B.
Adaptive TXOP assignment. This information is transmitted with each packet to the QAP carrying the next frame size. Upon each data frame reception, the HC recalculates the TXOP duration to be granted for the specific station in the next S1 so as to adapt to the fast varying in VBR video traffic.
See also Page 4, Section III.B
2) Operation at the access point: After the traffic setup phase, the QAP transmits the first poll frame granting the QSTA a TXOP duration. The station will accordingly transmit the first packet of its traffic to the QAP.
TXOPi in Eq (6)).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to take the technique of Adaptive TXOP Assignment for QoS Support in IEEE 802.11e Networks of AL-MAQRI to the system of Dynamic TXOP configuration for Qos enhancement in IEEE 802.lle wireless LAN of MAJKOWSKI in order to take the advantage of method for an efficient allocation of TXOP scheduling traffic for QSTAs maintaining QoS (AL-MAQRI: Page 1, Section 1. INTRODUCTION).
Regarding claim 15, the claim is interpreted and rejected for the same reason as set forth for claim 2.
Regarding claim 16, the claim is interpreted and rejected for the same reason as set forth for claim 3.
Regarding claim 17, the claim is interpreted and rejected for the same reason as set forth for claim 4.
Regarding claim 20, MAJKOWSKI, in view of AL-MAQRI teaches the AP wireless device of claim 13.
MAJKOWSKI does not explicitly disclose wherein the AP wireless device is further configured to:
determine whether the wireless device can initiate the second TXOP without wireless medium contention based at least in part on one or more of:
stream classification service (SCS) scheduled low latency data transmission timing; or
restricted target wake time service period (R-TWT SP) timing.
AL-MAQRI teaches wherein the AP wireless device is further configured to:
determine whether the wireless device can initiate the second TXOP without wireless medium contention based at least in part on one or more of:
stream classification service (SCS) scheduled low latency data transmission timing (
Page 2, Section II.B
the QoS-enabled station (QSTA), issues a QoS reservation through transmitting an ADDTSRequest frame. This frame carries information about the TS characteristics (TSPEC) which is required by HC for scheduling purpose. The mandatory fields of the TSPEC are described as follows:
Mean Data Rate (p): the average data rate of the packets in units of bits per second.
Nominal MSDU Size (L): the mean size of the MAC packet in units of bytes.
Maximum MSDU Size (JI): the maximum allowable size of the MAC packet in the TS in units of bytes.
Delay Bound (D): the maximum allowed delay for a packet to be transmitted through the wireless medium in units of milliseconds.
.....
The HC which usually resides in the QoS-enabled Access Point (QAP) maintains theses TSPECs in so-called polling list. HC computes the duration of the time to be granted to each QSTA to transmit its traffics (TXOP). The admission of the TSs is governed by HC, using the Admission Control Unit (ACU). The HC reserves the right to accept or reject any TS so as to preserve the QoS of the previously admitted TSs. If HC accepts the traffic it will respond by an ADDTS-Response or a rejection message otherwise.
2) TXOP Allocation: HC allocates different TXOP to each admitted QSTA so as to transmit their data with respect to the negotiated QoS parameters of the TSPEC. This TXOP is calculated for each station ....
Page 4, Section III.B
2) Operation at the access point: After the traffic setup phase, the QAP transmits the first poll frame granting the QSTA a TXOP duration. The station will accordingly transmit the first packet of its traffic to the QAP.
(It is obvious as use case that stream classification service (SCS) scheduled low latency data transmission timing is indicated by QSTA providing TSPEC field values and considered by QAP when granting TXOP for QSTA)); or
restricted target wake time service period (R-TWT SP) timing.
Claim 12 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Majkowski et al. (“Dynamic TXOP configuration for Qos enhancement in IEEE 802.11 e wireless LAN”, of IDS, hereinafter ‘MAJKOWSKI) in view of Al-Maqri et al. (“Adaptive TXOP Assignment for QoS Support of Video Traffic in IEEE 802.1 le Networks”, of IDS, hereinafter ‘AL-MAQRI’) and with further in view of Walton et al. (US 20050135295 A1, hereinafter ‘WALTON’).
Regarding claim 11, MAJKOWSKI, in view of AL-MAQRI teaches the apparatus of claim 7.
MAJKOWSKI and AL-MAQRI do not explicitly disclose wherein the second TXOP is initiated a priority interframe space (PIFS) after the first TXOP, wherein determining that the first wireless device can initiate the second TXOP without wireless medium contention is based at least in part on wireless medium availability at the PIFS after the first TXOP.
In analogous art, WALTON teaches wherein the second TXOP is initiated a priority interframe space (PIFS) after the first TXOP, wherein determining that the first wireless device can initiate the second TXOP without wireless medium contention is based at least in part on wireless medium availability at the PIFS after the first TXOP (
Fig. 9, [0111] The PCF may be used to allow an AP to provide centralized control of the channel. An AP may gain control of the medium after sensing the medium to be idle for a PIFS duration. The PIFS is shorter than the DIFS and thus has higher priority than DIFS. Once the AP has gained access to the channel it can provide contention-free access opportunities to other STAs and thus improve MAC efficiency compared to DCF. Note that SIFS has higher priority than PIFS, so the PCF must wait until any SIFS sequences complete before taking control of the channel.
[0112] Once the AP gains access to the medium using the PIFS it can establish a Contention-Free Period (CFP) during which the AP can provide polled access to associated STAs. The contention-free poll (CF-Poll), or simply poll, is transmitted by the AP and is followed by a transmission from the polled STA to the AP. Once again, the STA must wait for a SIFS duration following the CF-Poll, although the polled STA need not wait for DIFS, or any backoff.
(It is obvious that STA or first wireless device needs to wait PIFS duration for initiating a contention-free second TXOP after end of first TXOP)).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to take the technique of using PIFS before TXOPs of WALTON to the system of Dynamic TXOP configuration for Qos enhancement in IEEE 802.lle wireless LAN of MAJKOWSKI and AL-MAQRI in order to take the advantage of method for so that AP can gain access to the channel and can provide contention-free access opportunities to other STAs and thus improve MAC efficiency to utilize shared resource efficiently (WALTON: [0024, 0111]).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 5-6 and 18-19 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and in intervening claims.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter:
Regarding claim 5, MAJKOWSKI, AL-MAQRI or any other prior art of record either alone or in combination fails to teach the method of claim 1, wherein the method further comprises:
receiving an indication of a TXOP duration limit from the AP wireless device; and
transmitting, to the AP wireless device, a multi-user (MU) request-to-send (RTS) frame indicating a desired duration for the first TXOP that is longer than the TXOP duration limit.
Regarding claim 6, the claim being dependent on claim 5 is interpreted same as claim 5.
Regarding claim 18, the claim with similar feature as in claim 5 is interpreted same as claim 5.
Regarding claim 19, the claim being dependent on claim 18 is interpreted same as claim 18.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure:
Wang et al. (US 20150071178 A1), describing METHOD AND APPARATUS FOR DATA TRANSMISSIONS IN A WIRELESS NETWORK
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 SHAH M RAHMAN whose telephone number is (571)272-8951. The examiner can normally be reached 9:30AM-5:30PM 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, UN C CHO can be reached at 571-272-7919. 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.
/SHAH M RAHMAN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2413
Prosecution Insights