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 .
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on 01/15/2026 has been entered. Claims 1-18 and 20-28 are pending and rejected. Claim 19 is cancelled.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claims 1, 5, 13, and 28 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Flammer, III (US 2015/0189676), hereinafter “Flammer”, in view of Lee et al. (US 2025/0089103), hereinafter “Lee”.
Regarding claims 1, 28, Flammer teaches:
A method or a device comprising:
a transceiver (see Flammer, Fig. 2, par. [0030]: FIG. 2 illustrates a digital radio transceiver 200 configured to implement multi-channel operation, according to one embodiment of the invention. Each node 110, 112, 130 within the wireless mesh network 104 of FIG. 1 includes at least one instance of the digital radio transceiver 200); and
a processor coupled to the transceiver (see Flammer, Fig. 2, par. [0030]: The digital radio transceiver 200 may include, without limitation, a microprocessor unit (MPU) 210, a digital signal processor (DSP) 214), the processor configurable to:
determining, by the device, a first aggregate parameter associated with transmissions from the device in the first communication channel, wherein the first aggregate parameter comprises a size of the transmissions and a power of the transmissions (see Flammer, par. [0027]: Once adjacency is established between the source node 110 and at least one intermediate node 130, the source node 110 may generate payload data for delivery to the destination node 112, when a path is available. The payload data may comprise an Internet protocol (IP) packet, an Ethernet frame, or any other technically feasible unit of data. Similarly, any technically feasible addressing and forwarding techniques may be implemented to facilitate delivery of the payload data from the source node 110 to the destination node 112. For example, the payload data may include a header field configured to include a destination address, such as an IP address or Ethernet media access control (MAC) address, and see par. [0045]: multiple channels are allocated in sequential ranges of radio frequency spectrum, with a set of channels situated in the lowest and highest frequency ranges designated as being restricted to one maximum transmission power level. Channels above the lowest frequency ranges and below the highest frequency ranges are designed as being restricted to a second, higher transmission power level, and so forth. The highest maximum transmission power level is only permitted on inner channels generally centered within the overall range of spectrum. Furthermore, different channel occupancy energy thresholds 176 may be specified for different channels; in this case, payloads for transmission (i.e. a size of the transmissions) and transmission power levels are determined for channels); and
in response to determining that the first aggregate parameter does not exceed a threshold parameter level, transmitting, by the device, the first upcoming transmission in the first communication channel (see Flammer, Fig. 5, par. [0056]: the digital radio transceiver may perform a set of frequency-selective filtering operations to sample the radio spectrum, whereby energy within each channel is measured by the filtering operations to assess occupancy for each channel. If the amount of energy measured within a given channel is above a predetermined threshold, such as the channel occupancy energy threshold 176, then the channel is deemed to be occupied. However, if the amount of energy measured within a channel is below the predetermined threshold, then the channel is deemed to be unoccupied, and see par. [0058]: the method proceeds to step 522, where the digital radio transceiver transmits payload data on a selected channel from a set of one or more unoccupied channels)
However, Flammer does not teach:
determining, by a device, a first upcoming transmission from the device in a first communication channel during a first time window;
determining, by the device, a first aggregate parameter associated with transmissions from the device during the first time window;
transmitting, by the device, the first upcoming transmission in the first communication channel during the first time window.
Lee, in the same field of endeavor, teaches:
determining, by a device, a first upcoming transmission from the device in a first communication channel during a first time window (see Lee, Figs. 12 and 13, par. [0135]: STA3 may also determine that it has low latency data to transmit to the AP (LL data arrives at STA3) while the AP is transmitting fragmented DL PPDU 1215, and see par. [0136]: STA2 and STA3 may each randomly select a slot in which to attempt to transmit its low latency data. In this example, the slot window includes three slots (N=3) and STA2 randomly selects slot 2 and STA3 randomly selects slot 3, and see par. [0147]: STA2 and STA3 may each randomly select a random subchannel in which to attempt to transmit its low latency data. In this example, there are two subchannels (the first subchannel and the second subchannel) and STA2 randomly selects the first subchannel and STA3 randomly selects the second subchannel; in this case, low latency data to transmit corresponds to a first upcoming transmission);
determining, by the device, a first aggregate parameter associated with transmissions from the device during the first time window (see Lee, par. [0081]: the third station STA3 may determine whether the channel is busy using the carrier sensing. Upon determining that the channel is not used by other devices during a DIFS period after the NAV timer has expired, the station STA3 may attempt to access the channel after a contention window elapses according to a backoff process, and see par. [0079]: When the station STA3 receives the RTS frame, it may set a NAV timer of the station STA3 for a transmission duration of subsequently transmitted frames (for example, a duration of SIFS+CTS frame duration+SIFS+data frame duration+SIFS+ACK frame duration) using duration information included in the RTS frame. When the station STA3 receives the CTS frame, it may set the NAV timer of the station STA3 for a transmission duration of subsequently transmitted frames using duration information included in the CTS frame; in this case, parameters are determined for transmission in time windows);
transmitting, by the device, the first upcoming transmission in the first communication channel during the first time window (see Lee, Fig. 13, par. [0147]: following a SIFS interval after the AP finishes transmitting fragmented DL PPDUs 1325 and 1330, STA2 may transmit low latency data frame 1332 to the AP in the first subchannel and STA3 may transmit low latency data frame 1335 to the AP in the second subchannel).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have modified the method or device of Flammer with the time window of Lee with a reasonable expectation of success. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification for the benefit of improving throughput and efficiency through coordination between devices (see Lee, par. [0113]).
Regarding claim 5, the combination of Flammer in view of Lee teaches the method.
Flammer does not teach, but Lee teaches:
wherein the first aggregate parameter further comprises a duration of the first upcoming transmission (see Lee, pars. [0097-0098]: the trigger frame plays a useful role in facilitating uplink multi-user (MU) transmissions. The purpose of the trigger frame is to allocate resources and solicit one or more Trigger-based (TB) Physical Layer Protocol Data Unit (PPDU) transmissions from the associated stations (STAs). The trigger frame contains information required by the responding STAs to send their Uplink TB PPDUs. This information includes the Trigger type, which specifies the type of TB PPDU expected, and the Uplink Length (UL Length), which indicates the duration of the uplink transmission, and see par. [0079]: When the station STA3 receives the RTS frame, it may set a NAV timer of the station STA3 for a transmission duration of subsequently transmitted frames (for example, a duration of SIFS+CTS frame duration+SIFS+data frame duration+SIFS+ACK frame duration) using duration information included in the RTS frame. When the station STA3 receives the CTS frame, it may set the NAV timer of the station STA3 for a transmission duration of subsequently transmitted frames using duration information included in the CTS frame) and types of transmission operations of the transmissions (see Lee, par. [0160]: when using an inter-PPDU based preemption in an environment where there are multiple subchannels available for transmission, random access can be made in the frequency domain to reduce the probability of collisions. In an embodiment, instead of random access, the AP assigns frequency resource units (e.g., subchannels) in which STAs are allowed to transmit low latency data (e.g., when the STA associated with the AP or when the STA is about to transmit low latency data)).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have modified the first aggregate parameter of Flammer with the duration and types of transmission operations of Lee with a reasonable expectation of success. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification for the benefit of improving throughput and efficiency through coordination between devices (see Lee, par. [0113]).
Regarding claim 13, the combination of Flammer in view of Lee teaches the method. Flammer further teaches:
further comprising, in response to determining that the first aggregate parameter exceeds the threshold parameter level:
listening to the first communication channel during the first time window to generate a first listening result (see Flammer, Fig. 5, par. [0058]: In, in step 520, the channel is still unoccupied, then the method proceeds to step 522, where the digital radio transceiver transmits payload data on a selected channel from a set of one or more unoccupied channels. A channel that remains unoccupied after an LBT listening time period has lapsed is considered to be still unoccupied); and
transmitting the first upcoming transmission in the first communication channel based on the first listening result (see Flammer, Fig. 5, par. [0058]: In, in step 520, the channel is still unoccupied, then the method proceeds to step 522, where the digital radio transceiver transmits payload data on a selected channel from a set of one or more unoccupied channels. A channel that remains unoccupied after an LBT listening time period has lapsed is considered to be still unoccupied).
Claims 2-4 and 12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Flammer in view of Lee, as applied to claims 1, 5, 13, and 28 above, and further in view of Yang et al. (US 2023/0126765), hereinafter "Yang", and further in view of Agardh et al. (US 2015/0341909), hereinafter "Agardh", and further in view of Wang et al. (US 2024/0235779), hereinafter “Wang”.
Regarding claim 2, the combination of Flammer in view of Lee teaches the method.
However, the combination of Flammer in view of Lee does not teach:
further comprising:
determining a second upcoming transmission in the first communication channel during a second time window;
determining a second aggregate parameter associated with transmissions of the device in the first communication channel during the second time window;
in response to determining that the second aggregate parameter does not exceed the threshold parameter level, transmitting the second upcoming transmission in the first communication channel during the second time window without listening to the first communication channel, wherein the second time window occurs after the first time window.
Yang, in the same field of endeavor, teaches:
in response to determining that the second aggregate parameter does not exceed the threshold parameter level, transmitting the second upcoming transmission (see Yang, par. [0053], lines 5-9: If the detected energy within the transmission/reception beam is lower than or equal to the directional beam based CCA detection threshold (Thr_1), channel is determined as idle (i.e., available) and the node can transmit a transmission on a transmission beam; in this case, the detected energy being less than the threshold corresponds to the parameter not exceeding the threshold) without listening to the first communication channel (see Yang, par. [0081], lines 1-10: all/each beam direction(s) and/or all/each frequency carrier(s)/subband(s)/RB set(s)/Bandwidth part (BWP) can share a common channel occupancy time. The common channel occupancy time is related to the first successful LBT operation or determined based on the largest/smallest of channel occupancy time or random selection for all carrier(s)/subband(s)/RB set(s)/Bandwidth part (BWP). Here, LBT can be “back-off” LBT mechanism or “without back-off” LBT mechanism, e.g., Cat4 LBT, enhanced Cat4 LBT, one or multiple Cat2 LBT, No LBT; in this case, No LBT optionally performed as the LBT operation),
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have modified the transmission of the first upcoming transmission of the combination of Flammer in view of Lee with the transmission in response to not exceeding a threshold and transmission without listening of Yang with a reasonable expectation of success. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification for the benefit of preventing a mismatch between a sensing beam and a transmission beam (see Yang, par. [0004]).
However, the combination of Flammer in view of Lee, and further in view of Yang does not teach:
further comprising:
determining a second upcoming transmission in the first communication channel during a second time window;
determining a second aggregate parameter associated with transmissions of the device in the first communication channel during the second time window;
transmitting the second upcoming transmission in the first communication channel during the second time window
wherein the second time window occurs after the first time window.
Agardh, in the same field of endeavor, teaches:
further comprising:
determining a second upcoming transmission in the first communication channel during a second time window (see Agardh, Figs. 3 and 4, par. [0032], lines 4-7: information may be received from the access point containing an aggregated information set characterizing future transmissions of a plurality of other devices, and see Agardh, par. [0034], lines 1-8: The aggregated information set may include an indication of channels that will be used for future transmission by the plurality of other devices. The intelligent CSMA scheduling afforded by various embodiments described herein allow the addition of channels to the scheduling of the CSMA protocol. The aggregated information set may include an indication of time slots or ranges of time slots that will be used for future transmission by the plurality of other devices; in this case, information indicates future transmissions (corresponding to a second upcoming transmission) using channels (corresponding to a first communication channel) and time slots (corresponding to a second time window));
determining a second aggregate parameter associated with transmissions of the device in the first communication channel during the second time window (see Agardh, par. [0012], lines 6-14: The access point may further perform operations including aggregating the information that characterizes the intended future transmissions from each of the plurality of devices to produce an aggregated information set characterizing future transmissions of the plurality of devices and transmitting, to at least one of the plurality of devices, aggregated information based on the aggregated information set characterizing future transmissions of the plurality of devices, and see Agardh, par. [0034], lines 8-16: The aggregated information set may include an indication of respective time offsets from a time event that will be used for future transmission by the plurality of other devices. The time offset may be indicated in terms of a measurement of time, such as 10 msec, or as a number of time slots. The time event may be the transmission and/or detection of a packet, an absolute time measurement, and/or determined by a periodic timer; in this case, aggregating the information that characterizes the intended future transmissions from each of the plurality of devices corresponds to determining a second aggregate parameter);
transmitting the second upcoming transmission in the first communication channel during the second time window (see Agardh, Fig. 10, par. [0040], lines 12-15: at Block 1001, the packet may be transmitted on a channel in a time slot that does not overlap the respective channels related to the periodic time intervals indicated by the aggregated set; in this case, transmission is performed based on channels and time slots associated with the aggregated information)
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have modified the method of the combination of Flammer in view of Lee, and further in view of Yang with the extra steps of Agardh with a reasonable expectation of success. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification for the benefit of alleviate collisions in communication (see Agardh, par. [0031]).
However, the combination of Flammer in view of Lee, and further in view of Yang, and further in view of Agardh, does not teach:
wherein the second time window occurs after the first time window.
Wang, in the same field of endeavor, teaches:
wherein the second time window occurs after the first time window (see Wang, Fig. 5, par. [0220], lines 5-15: For a PUSCH repetition in a TDD system, assuming that a second special slot in FIG. 5 is configured with PDCCH monitoring (Configured PDCCH monitoring), if duration without a PDCCH skipping indication or not configured with a PDCCH skipping indication does not include a configured PDCCH monitoring occasion, UE needs to perform PDCCH monitoring within the special slot. The special slot cannot be used for the PUSCH repetition transmission, and a transmission that meets a first condition cannot be maintained either. Therefore, the determined second time window cannot include the special slot; in this case, the first time window may start before the second time window, corresponding to the second time window occurring after the first time window).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have modified the time windows of the combination of Flammer in view of Lee, and further in view of Yang, and further in view of Agardh, with the second time window occurring after the first time window of Wang with a reasonable expectation of success. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification for the benefit of improving accuracy of channel estimation and coverage capability (see Wang, par. [0224]).
Regarding claim 3, the combination of Flammer in view of Lee, and further in view of Yang, and further in view of Agardh, and further in view of Wang, teaches the method.
The combination of Flammer in view of Lee, and further in view of Yang, and further in view of Agardh, does not teach, but Wang teaches:
wherein the second time window partially overlaps with the first time window (see Wang, Fig. 5, par. [0220], lines 5-15: For a PUSCH repetition in a TDD system, assuming that a second special slot in FIG. 5 is configured with PDCCH monitoring (Configured PDCCH monitoring), if duration without a PDCCH skipping indication or not configured with a PDCCH skipping indication does not include a configured PDCCH monitoring occasion, UE needs to perform PDCCH monitoring within the special slot. The special slot cannot be used for the PUSCH repetition transmission, and a transmission that meets a first condition cannot be maintained either. Therefore, the determined second time window cannot include the special slot; in this case, part of the first window overlaps with the second window, corresponding to the second time window partially overlapping with the first time window).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have modified the time windows of the combination of Flammer in view of Lee, and further in view of Yang, and further in view of Agardh, with the second time window partially overlapping with the first time window of Wang with a reasonable expectation of success. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification for the benefit of improving accuracy of channel estimation and coverage capability (see Wang, par. [0224]).
Regarding claim 4, the combination of Flammer in view of Lee, and further in view of Yang, and further in view of Agardh, and further in view of Wang, teaches the method.
The combination of Flammer in view of Lee, and further in view of Yang, and further in view of Agardh, does not teach, but Wang teaches:
wherein the first time window and the second time window have the same duration (see Wang, Fig. 7, par. [0222], lines 3-13: in FIG. 7, if a maximum gap in which power consistency and phase continuity can be maintained as specified in a frequency band is 8 symbols, or a maximum gap in which current UE can maintain power consistency and phase continuity is 8 symbols, assuming that the UE performs a PUSCH transmission for which DMRS bundling is enabled in the frequency band, where a transmission gap with a length of 6 symbols and a transmission gap with a length of 10 symbols exist, for the transmission gap with the length of 6 symbols, the UE may determine not to divide a first time window; in this case, the first and second time windows may have the same number of slots (i.e. the same duration)).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have modified the time windows of the combination of Flammer in view of Lee, and further in view of Yang, and further in view of Agardh, with the time windows having the same duration of Wang with a reasonable expectation of success. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification for the benefit of improving accuracy of channel estimation and coverage capability (see Wang, par. [0224]).
Regarding claim 12, the combination of Flammer in view of Lee teaches the method.
However, the combination of Flammer in view of Lee does not teach:
further comprising, in response to determining that the first aggregate parameter exceeds the threshold parameter level, transmitting the first upcoming transmission in a second time window in the first communication channel without listening to the first communication channel, wherein the second time window occurs after the first time window.
Yang, in the same field of endeavor, teaches:
transmitting the first upcoming transmission without listening to the first communication channel (see Yang, par. [0053], lines 5-9: If the detected energy within the transmission/reception beam is lower than or equal to the directional beam based CCA detection threshold (Thr_1), channel is determined as idle (i.e., available) and the node can transmit a transmission on a transmission beam, and see par. [0081], lines 1-10: all/each beam direction(s) and/or all/each frequency carrier(s)/subband(s)/RB set(s)/Bandwidth part (BWP) can share a common channel occupancy time. The common channel occupancy time is related to the first successful LBT operation or determined based on the largest/smallest of channel occupancy time or random selection for all carrier(s)/subband(s)/RB set(s)/Bandwidth part (BWP). Here, LBT can be “back-off” LBT mechanism or “without back-off” LBT mechanism, e.g., Cat4 LBT, enhanced Cat4 LBT, one or multiple Cat2 LBT, No LBT; in this case, No LBT optionally performed as the LBT operation),
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have modified the transmission of the first upcoming transmission of the combination of Flammer in view of Lee with the transmission without listening of Yang with a reasonable expectation of success. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification for the benefit of preventing a mismatch between a sensing beam and a transmission beam (see Yang, par. [0004]).
However, the combination of Flammer in view of Lee, and further in view of Yang does not teach:
further comprising, in response to determining that the first aggregate parameter exceeds the threshold parameter level, transmitting the first upcoming transmission in a second time window in the first communication channel
wherein the second time window occurs after the first time window.
Agardh, in the same field of endeavor, teaches:
further comprising, in response to determining that the first aggregate parameter exceeds the threshold parameter level (see Agardh, Fig. 4, par. [0033], lines 3-12: at Block 401, transmission of the packet maybe controlled based on the aggregated information set characterizing future transmissions of the plurality of other devices. The aggregated information set may be used by the device to transmit a packet under certain conditions such as when buffer capacity of the device is reaching a threshold. When the buffer capacity reaches a threshold, the aggregated information may be considered such that the packet may be successfully transmitted in a short time frame with less chance of collision; in this case, buffer capacity reaching a threshold corresponds to the parameter exceeding the threshold), transmitting the first upcoming transmission in a second time window in the first communication channel (see Agardh, Figs. 10, 17, and 18, par. [0040], lines 12-15: at Block 1001, the packet may be transmitted on a channel in a time slot that does not overlap the respective channels related to the periodic time intervals indicated by the aggregated set; in this case, transmission is performed based on channels and time slots associated with the aggregated information)
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have modified the method of the combination of Flammer in view of Lee, and further in view of Yang with the transmitting in a second time window of Agardh with a reasonable expectation of success. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification for the benefit of alleviate collisions in communication (see Agardh, par. [0031]).
However, the combination of Flammer in view of Lee, and further in view of Yang, and further in view of Agardh, does not teach:
wherein the second time window occurs after the first time window.
Wang, in the same field of endeavor, teaches:
wherein the second time window occurs after the first time window (see Wang, Fig. 5, par. [0220], lines 5-15: For a PUSCH repetition in a TDD system, assuming that a second special slot in FIG. 5 is configured with PDCCH monitoring (Configured PDCCH monitoring), if duration without a PDCCH skipping indication or not configured with a PDCCH skipping indication does not include a configured PDCCH monitoring occasion, UE needs to perform PDCCH monitoring within the special slot. The special slot cannot be used for the PUSCH repetition transmission, and a transmission that meets a first condition cannot be maintained either. Therefore, the determined second time window cannot include the special slot; in this case, the first time window may start before the second time window, corresponding to the second time window occurring after the first time window).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have modified the time windows of the combination of Flammer in view of Lee, and further in view of Yang, and further in view of Agardh, with the second time window occurring after the first time window of Wang with a reasonable expectation of success. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification for the benefit of improving accuracy of channel estimation and coverage capability (see Wang, par. [0224]).
Claims 6-7 and 11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Flammer in view of Lee, as applied to claims 1, 5, 13, and 28 above, and further in view of Yang, and further in view of Agardh.
Regarding claim 6, the combination of Flammer in view of Lee teaches the method.
However, the combination of Flammer in view of Lee does not teach:
further comprising, in response to determining that the first aggregate parameter exceeds the threshold parameter level, transmitting the first upcoming transmission in a second communication channel during the first time window without listening to the second communication channel.
Yang, in the same field of endeavor, teaches:
transmitting the first upcoming transmission without listening to the second communication channel (see Yang, par. [0053], lines 5-9: If the detected energy within the transmission/reception beam is lower than or equal to the directional beam based CCA detection threshold (Thr_1), channel is determined as idle (i.e., available) and the node can transmit a transmission on a transmission beam, and see par. [0081], lines 1-10: all/each beam direction(s) and/or all/each frequency carrier(s)/subband(s)/RB set(s)/Bandwidth part (BWP) can share a common channel occupancy time. The common channel occupancy time is related to the first successful LBT operation or determined based on the largest/smallest of channel occupancy time or random selection for all carrier(s)/subband(s)/RB set(s)/Bandwidth part (BWP). Here, LBT can be “back-off” LBT mechanism or “without back-off” LBT mechanism, e.g., Cat4 LBT, enhanced Cat4 LBT, one or multiple Cat2 LBT, No LBT; in this case, No LBT optionally performed as the LBT operation).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have modified the transmission of the first upcoming transmission of the combination of Flammer in view of Lee with the transmission without listening of Yang with a reasonable expectation of success. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification for the benefit of preventing a mismatch between a sensing beam and a transmission beam (see Yang, par. [0004]).
However, the combination of Flammer in view of Lee, and further in view of Yang does not teach:
further comprising, in response to determining that the first aggregate parameter exceeds the threshold parameter level, transmitting the first upcoming transmission in a second communication channel during the first time window
Agardh, in the same field of endeavor, teaches:
further comprising, in response to determining that the first aggregate parameter exceeds the threshold parameter level (see Agardh, Fig. 4, par. [0033], lines 3-12: at Block 401, transmission of the packet maybe controlled based on the aggregated information set characterizing future transmissions of the plurality of other devices. The aggregated information set may be used by the device to transmit a packet under certain conditions such as when buffer capacity of the device is reaching a threshold. When the buffer capacity reaches a threshold, the aggregated information may be considered such that the packet may be successfully transmitted in a short time frame with less chance of collision; in this case, buffer capacity reaching a threshold corresponds to the parameter exceeding the threshold), transmitting the first upcoming transmission in a second communication channel during the first time window (see Agardh, Figs. 10, 17, and 18, par. [0040], lines 12-15: at Block 1001, the packet may be transmitted on a channel in a time slot that does not overlap the respective channels related to the periodic time intervals indicated by the aggregated set; in this case, transmission is performed based on channels and time slots associated with the aggregated information)
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have modified the method of the combination of Flammer in view of Lee, and further in view of Yang with the transmitting in a second communication channel of Agardh with a reasonable expectation of success. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification for the benefit of alleviate collisions in communication (see Agardh, par. [0031]).
Regarding claim 7, the combination of Flammer in view of Lee, and further in view of Yang, teaches the method.
The combination of Flammer in view of Lee does not teach, but Yang teaches:
transmitting the first upcoming transmission in response to the second aggregate parameter being below the threshold parameter level (see Yang, par. [0053], lines 5-9: If the detected energy within the transmission/reception beam is lower than or equal to the directional beam based CCA detection threshold (Thr_1), channel is determined as idle (i.e., available) and the node can transmit a transmission on a transmission beam, and see Yang, par. [0081], lines 1-10: all/each beam direction(s) and/or all/each frequency carrier(s)/subband(s)/RB set(s)/Bandwidth part (BWP) can share a common channel occupancy time. The common channel occupancy time is related to the first successful LBT operation or determined based on the largest/smallest of channel occupancy time or random selection for all carrier(s)/subband(s)/RB set(s)/Bandwidth part (BWP). Here, LBT can be “back-off” LBT mechanism or “without back-off” LBT mechanism, e.g., Cat4 LBT, enhanced Cat4 LBT, one or multiple Cat2 LBT, No LBT; in this case, the detected energy being less than the threshold corresponds to the parameter not exceeding the threshold and No LBT is optionally performed as the LBT operation).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have modified the transmission of the first upcoming transmission of the combination of Flammer in view of Lee with the transmission in response to being below a threshold of Yang with a reasonable expectation of success. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification for the benefit of preventing a mismatch between a sensing beam and a transmission beam (see Yang, par. [0004]).
However, the combination of Flammer in view of Lee, and further in view of Yang does not teach:
further comprising determining a second aggregate parameter associated with transmissions of the device in the second communication channel during the first time window,
Agardh, in the same field of endeavor, teaches:
further comprising determining a second aggregate parameter associated with transmissions of the device in the second communication channel during the first time window (see Agardh, par. [0012], lines 6-14: The access point may further perform operations including aggregating the information that characterizes the intended future transmissions from each of the plurality of devices to produce an aggregated information set characterizing future transmissions of the plurality of devices and transmitting, to at least one of the plurality of devices, aggregated information based on the aggregated information set characterizing future transmissions of the plurality of devices, and see Agardh, par. [0034], lines 8-16: The aggregated information set may include an indication of respective time offsets from a time event that will be used for future transmission by the plurality of other devices. The time offset may be indicated in terms of a measurement of time, such as 10 msec, or as a number of time slots. The time event may be the transmission and/or detection of a packet, an absolute time measurement, and/or determined by a periodic timer; in this case, aggregating the information that characterizes the intended future transmissions from each of the plurality of devices corresponds to determining a second aggregate parameter),
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have modified the method of the combination of Flammer in view of Lee, and further in view of Yang with the determining a second aggregate parameter of Agardh with a reasonable expectation of success. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification for the benefit of alleviate collisions in communication (see Agardh, par. [0031]).
Regarding claim 11, the combination of Flammer in view of Lee teaches the method.
However, the combination of Flammer in view of Lee does not teach:
further comprising, in response to determining that the first aggregate parameter exceeds the threshold parameter level:
determining a different aggregate parameter with which to configure to the first upcoming transmission during the first time window;
configuring the first upcoming transmission with the different aggregate parameter; and
transmitting the first upcoming transmission in the first communication channel during the first time window without listening to the first communication channel.
Yang, in the same field of endeavor, teaches:
transmitting without listening to the first communication channel (see Yang, par. [0081], lines 1-10: all/each beam direction(s) and/or all/each frequency carrier(s)/subband(s)/RB set(s)/Bandwidth part (BWP) can share a common channel occupancy time. The common channel occupancy time is related to the first successful LBT operation or determined based on the largest/smallest of channel occupancy time or random selection for all carrier(s)/subband(s)/RB set(s)/Bandwidth part (BWP). Here, LBT can be “back-off” LBT mechanism or “without back-off” LBT mechanism, e.g., Cat4 LBT, enhanced Cat4 LBT, one or multiple Cat2 LBT, No LBT; in this case, No LBT optionally performed as the LBT operation).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have modified the transmission of the first upcoming transmission of the combination of Flammer in view of Lee with the transmission without listening of Yang with a reasonable expectation of success. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification for the benefit of preventing a mismatch between a sensing beam and a transmission beam (see Yang, par. [0004]).
However, the combination of Flammer in view of Lee, and further in view of Yang does not teach:
further comprising, in response to determining that the first aggregate parameter exceeds the threshold parameter level:
determining a different aggregate parameter with which to configure to the first upcoming transmission during the first time window;
configuring the first upcoming transmission with the different aggregate parameter; and
transmitting the first upcoming transmission in the first communication channel during the first time window
Agardh, in the same field of endeavor, teaches:
further comprising, in response to determining that the first aggregate parameter exceeds the threshold parameter level:
determining a different aggregate parameter with which to configure to the first upcoming transmission during the first time window (see Agardh, Fig. 4, par. [0033], lines 3-12: at Block 401, transmission of the packet maybe controlled based on the aggregated information set characterizing future transmissions of the plurality of other devices. The aggregated information set may be used by the device to transmit a packet under certain conditions such as when buffer capacity of the device is reaching a threshold. When the buffer capacity reaches a threshold, the aggregated information may be considered such that the packet may be successfully transmitted in a short time frame with less chance of collision, and see Agardh, par. [0034], lines 8-16: The aggregated information set may include an indication of respective time offsets from a time event that will be used for future transmission by the plurality of other devices. The time offset may be indicated in terms of a measurement of time, such as 10 msec, or as a number of time slots. The time event may be the transmission and/or detection of a packet, an absolute time measurement, and/or determined by a periodic timer; in this case, aggregating the information that characterizes the intended future transmissions from each of the plurality of devices corresponds to determining a different aggregate parameter. This information is considered when the buffer capacity reaches a threshold (corresponding to the first aggregate parameter exceeding a threshold));
configuring the first upcoming transmission with the different aggregate parameter (see Agardh, par. [0038], lines 7-9: at Block 801, the timing of transmission of the packet may be controlled based on the time offsets indicated by the aggregated information set; in this case, timing of transmission (corresponding to configuring the upcoming transmission) is performed with the aggregated information); and
transmitting the first upcoming transmission in the first communication channel during the first time window (see Agardh, Figs. 10, 17, and 18, par. [0040], lines 12-15: at Block 1001, the packet may be transmitted on a channel in a time slot that does not overlap the respective channels related to the periodic time intervals indicated by the aggregated set; in this case, transmission is performed based on channels and time slots associated with the aggregated information)
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have modified the method of the combination of Flammer in view of Lee, and further in view of Yang with the extra steps of Agardh with a reasonable expectation of success. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification for the benefit of alleviate collisions in communication (see Agardh, par. [0031]).
Claims 8-10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Flammer in view of Lee, and further in view of Agardh, as applied to claims 6-7 and 11 above, and further in view of Hu (US 2021/0289564), hereinafter “Hu”.
Regarding claim 8, the combination of Flammer in view of Lee, and further in view of Agardh, teaches the method.
However, the combination of Flammer in view of Lee, and further in view of Agardh, does not teach:
transmitting the first upcoming transmission using a Multi-Link Operation.
Hu, in the same field of endeavor, teaches:
transmitting the first upcoming transmission using a Multi-Link Operation (see Hu, par. [0079], lines 5-19: The latency sensitive traffic can include or correspond to periodic and/or bursty traffic, and the amount of traffic can vary, for example, during downlink transmissions or uplink transmission, or peer-to-peer transmissions. In embodiments, the traffic may complete (e.g., complete DL, complete UL) transmission prior to the end of a current service period (e.g., group of contiguous time slots 112) or a single time slot 112. The wireless node 102 can assign and give priority access during prioritized time slots 112 to latency sensitive traffic based in part on requests 142 received from wireless devices and if the respective traffic completes prior to the end of a time slot 112, non-prioritized or regular traffic can access the remaining portion of the priority slot, e.g., to support multi-link operations and provide flexible scheduling).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have modified the transmitting the first upcoming transmission of the combination of Flammer in view of Lee, and further in view of Agardh, with the transmission using a Multi-Link Operation of Hu with a reasonable expectation of success. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification for the benefit of flexibility in scheduling while maintaining support for latency sensitive applications (see Hu, par. [0031]).
Regarding claim 9, the combination of Flammer in view of Lee, and further in view of Agardh, and further in view of Hu, teaches the method.
The combination of Flammer in view of Lee, and further in view of Agardh, does not teach, but Hu teaches:
wherein the Multi-Link Operation is in accordance with a Wi-Fi communication protocol (see Hu, par. [0106], lines 4-6: the wireless node 102, wireless device 150 or both of FIG. 1 are implemented by the computing system 514, and see Hu, par. [0106], lines 13-16: the computing system 514 can include conventional computer components such as processors 516, storage device 518, network interface 520, and see Hu, par. [0107], lines 1-8: Network interface 520 can provide a connection to a wide area network (e.g., the Internet) to which WAN interface of a remote server system is also connected. Network interface 520 can include a wired interface (e.g., Ethernet) and/or a wireless interface implementing various RF data communication standards such as Wi-Fi, Bluetooth, or cellular data network standards (e.g., 3G, 4G, 5G, 60 GHz, LTE, etc.); in this case, the wireless node performing a multi-link operation may contain components for connection via Wi-Fi).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have modified the method of the combination of Flammer in view of Lee, and further in view of Agardh, with the Multi-Link Operation being in accordance with a Wi-Fi protocol of Hu with a reasonable expectation of success. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification for the benefit of flexibility in scheduling while maintaining support for latency sensitive applications (see Hu, par. [0031]).
Regarding claim 10, the combination of Flammer in view of Lee, and further in view of Agardh, and further in view of Hu, teaches the method.
The combination of Flammer in view of Lee, and further in view of Agardh, does not teach, but Hu teaches:
wherein the Multi-Link Operation is in accordance with an LTE communication protocol (see Hu, par. [0106], lines 4-6: the wireless node 102, wireless device 150 or both of FIG. 1 are implemented by the computing system 514, and see Hu, par. [0106], lines 13-16: the computing system 514 can include conventional computer components such as processors 516, storage device 518, network interface 520, and see Hu, par. [0107], lines 1-8: Network interface 520 can provide a connection to a wide area network (e.g., the Internet) to which WAN interface of a remote server system is also connected. Network interface 520 can include a wired interface (e.g., Ethernet) and/or a wireless interface implementing various RF data communication standards such as Wi-Fi, Bluetooth, or cellular data network standards (e.g., 3G, 4G, 5G, 60 GHz, LTE, etc.); in this case, the wireless node performing a multi-link operation may contain components for connection via LTE).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have modified the method of the combination of Flammer in view of Lee, and further in view of Agardh, with the Multi-Link Operation being in accordance with an LTE protocol of Hu with a reasonable expectation of success. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification for the benefit of flexibility in scheduling while maintaining support for latency sensitive applications (see Hu, par. [0031]).
Claim 14 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Flammer in view of Lee, as applied to claims 1, 5, 13, and 28 above, and further in view of Harada et al. (US 11,540,335), hereinafter “Harada”.
Regarding claim 14, the combination of Flammer in view of Lee teaches the method.
Flammer does not teach, but Lee teaches:
wherein transmitting the first upcoming transmission based on the first listening result comprises transmitting the first upcoming transmission during the first time window in the first communication channel (see Lee, Fig. 13, par. [0147]: following a SIFS interval after the AP finishes transmitting fragmented DL PPDUs 1325 and 1330, STA2 may transmit low latency data frame 1332 to the AP in the first subchannel and STA3 may transmit low latency data frame 1335 to the AP in the second subchannel)
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have modified the method or device of Flammer with the transmitting based on listening result in the first time window of Lee with a reasonable expectation of success. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification for the benefit of improving throughput and efficiency through coordination between devices (see Lee, par. [0113]).
However, the combination of Flammer in view of Lee does not teach:
when the first listening result is indicative of the first communication channel not being busy.
Harada, in the same field of endeavor, teaches:
when the first listening result is indicative of the first communication channel not being busy (see Harada, col. 5, lines 40-42: each transmission point (access point) starts transmitting data when the channel is judged to be in the idle state by means of listening).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have modified the transmission of the first upcoming transmission of the combination of Flammer in view of Lee with the transmission when a listening result indicates the channel as not being busy of Harada with a reasonable expectation of success. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification for the benefit of reducing the possibility of collisions (see Harada, col. 5, lines 39-51).
Claim 15 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Flammer in view of Lee, as applied to claims 1, 5, 13, and 28 above, and further in view of Knaappila (US 2018/0007523), hereinafter “Knaappila”.
Regarding claim 15, the combination of Flammer in view of Lee teaches the method.
However, the combination of Flammer in view of Lee does not teach:
wherein a duration of the listening to the first communication channel during the first time window is based on the first upcoming transmission.
Knaappila, in the same field of endeavor, teaches:
wherein a duration of the listening to the first communication channel during the first time window is based on the first upcoming transmission (see Knaappila, par. [0011], lines 11-16: calculating a pseudorandom number using the discovered packet transmission timing parameters and using the calculated pseudorandom number to determine a listening time for a future transmitted packet; and listening for a future transmitted packet at the determined listening time).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have modified the listening of the combination of Flammer in view of Lee with the duration of listening of Knaappila with a reasonable expectation of success. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification for the benefit of saving power by reducing the length of the listening window (see Knaappila, par. [0006]).
Claim 16 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Flammer in view of Lee, and further in view of Knaappila, as applied to claim 15 above, and further in view of Park et al. (US 2012/0014245), hereinafter “Park”.
Regarding claim 16, the combination of Flammer in view of Lee, and further in view of Knaappila, teaches the method.
However, the combination of Flammer in view of Lee, and further in view of Knaappila, does not teach:
further comprising determining a first re-transmission rate associated with the first upcoming transmission, wherein the duration of the listening to the first communication channel is based on the first re-transmission rate.
Park, in the same field of endeavor, teaches:
further comprising determining a first re-transmission rate associated with the first upcoming transmission, wherein the duration of the listening to the first communication channel is based on the first re-transmission rate (see Park, par. [0089], lines 1-10: the SBC-REQ message and the REG-REQ message may include at least one of a fast retransmission support field indicating whether or not a failed HARQ burst is retransmitted by extending the listening window by a predetermined length when the HARQ burst transmission has failed, an extension time duration field indicating a time duration of listening window extension for retransmission of the failed HARQ burst, and an Nextension field (e.g. a timer) indicating an operation time for the HARQ operation when HARQ is applied; in this case, determining a fast retransmission support field corresponds to a first retransmission rate, which is used for determining to extend the listening window (corresponding to the duration of listening being based on the retransmission rate)).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have modified the duration of the listening of the combination of Flammer in view of Lee, and further in view of Knaappila, with the duration being based on a retransmission rate of Park with a reasonable expectation of success. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification for the benefit of ensuring reliable transmission and preventing unnecessary power consumption (see Park, pars. [0039-0040], [0124]).
Claim 17 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Flammer in view of Lee, and further in view of Knaappila, as applied to claim 15 above, and further in view of Bengtsson (US 2016/0373985), hereinafter “Bengtsson”.
Regarding claim 17, the combination of Flammer in view of Lee, and further in view of Knaappila, teaches the method.
However, the combination of Flammer in view of Lee, and further in view of Knaappila, does not teach:
wherein the duration of the listening to the first communication channel is based on a bit error rate (BER) associated with the first communication channel.
Bengtsson, in the same field of endeavor, teaches:
wherein the duration of the listening to the first communication channel is based on a bit error rate (BER) associated with the first communication channel (see Bengtsson, Fig. 3, par. [0048], lines 12-17: such a determination may include detecting possible contamination in the pilot channel, e.g., detecting a sudden increase in BER or the like, and, subsequently, requesting that the UE remain silent during a next-in-time frame designated for pilot signal transmission and listening for contamination in the next-in-time frame; in this case, listening for contamination in the next-in-time frame is based on a bit error rate).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have modified the duration of listening of the combination of Flammer in view of Lee, and further in view of Knaappila, with the duration being based on a bit error rate of Bengtsson with a reasonable expectation of success. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification for the benefit of standardizing reporting of pilot contamination for improved pilot resource re-use (see Bengtsson, par. [0008]).
Claim 18 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Flammer in view of Lee, as applied to claims 1, 5, 13, and 28 above, and further in view of Yerramalli et al. (US 2018/0124789), hereinafter “Yerramalli”.
Regarding claim 18, the combination of Flammer in view of Lee teaches the method.
However, the combination of Flammer in view of Lee does not teach:
wherein listening to the first communication channel comprises performing a detect-and-avoid operation.
Yerramalli, in the same field of endeavor, teaches:
wherein listening to the first communication channel comprises performing a detect-and-avoid operation (see Yerramalli, par. [0112], lines 1-3: At least one of two Detect And Avoid (DAA) methods may be employed. Listen Before Transmit (LBT) is one example of a DAA method, and see Yerramalli, par. [0112], 14-17: When using LBT based DAA, if a signal is detected, a jump may be made to the next frequency in the hopping sequence provided the time for a maximum dwell time is respected).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have modified the listening of the combination of Flammer in view of Lee with the listening being a detect-and-avoid operation of Yerramalli with a reasonable expectation of success. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification for the benefit of enabling larger numbers of UEs to be served by fewer base stations (see Yerramalli, par. [0009]).
Claim 20 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Flammer in view of Lee, as applied to claims 1, 5, 13, and 28 above, and further in view of Zeng et al. (US 2006/0029024), hereinafter “Zeng”.
Regarding claim 20, the combination of Flammer in view of Lee teaches the method.
However, the combination of Flammer in view of Lee does not teach:
further comprising transmitting an empty packet during the first time window in the first communication channel in response to the first listening result being indicative of the first communication channel being busy.
Zeng, in the same field of endeavor, teaches:
further comprising transmitting an empty packet during the first time window in the first communication channel in response to the first listening result being indicative of the first communication channel being busy (see Zeng, Fig. 7, par. [0053], lines 10-19: In FIG. 7, the QAP 705 does not have any buffered data packets for the QSTA 710 and communicates this to the QSTA 710 using a null data packet 755. However, if the channel is busy, the QAP 705 must perform a backoff 760 before transmitting the null data packet 755. The QAP 705 can set an EOSP indicator in the null data packet 755 to indicate that the service period should be terminated. Upon receipt of the null data packet 755, the QSTA 710 transmits an ACK 765 and switches back into the sleep mode 720; in this case, a null packet (i.e. empty packet) is transmitted after a backoff (corresponding to a first time window) after the channel is busy).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have modified the method of the combination of Flammer in view of Lee with the transmission of an empty packet in response to a channel being busy of Zeng with a reasonable expectation of success. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification for the benefit of lowering battery power consumption and reducing protocol overhead (see Zeng, par. [0016]).
Claims 21-22 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Flammer in view of Lee, as applied to claims 1, 5, 13, and 28 above, and further in view of Kim et al. (KR 100454686), hereinafter “Kim” (see “KR100454686B1_Translation.pdf” for citations).
Regarding claim 21, the combination of Flammer in view of Lee teaches the method.
However, the combination of Flammer in view of Lee does not teach:
wherein the first upcoming transmission is associated with a first communication protocol, the method further comprising, in response to determining that the first aggregate parameter exceeds the threshold parameter level, adjusting a list of channels of a frequency hopping sequence associated with the first communication protocol.
Kim, in the same field of endeavor, teaches:
wherein the first upcoming transmission is associated with a first communication protocol, the method further comprising, in response to determining that the first aggregate parameter exceeds the threshold parameter level, adjusting a list of channels of a frequency hopping sequence associated with the first communication protocol (see Kim, page 3, par. 17: The adaptive sequence generation 121 generates an adaptive frequency hopping sequence group to be used for future communication by storing a threshold value of the link quality index in advance for each hopping frequency and determining a group of channels satisfying the hopping frequency. If there is no hopping channel that satisfies this threshold because the link quality index is large, the next best option is to search for a group having the largest value among the hopping channels and randomly select one of them to select a hopping sequence. Will be constructed. Thereafter, communication 17 is performed using the generated new hopping frequency through a new protocol negotiation 16 between a master terminal and a slave terminal in Bluetooth; in this case, if the link quality index is large and exceeds a threshold, a new channel is selected as a hopping sequence (corresponding to adjusting a list of channels of a frequency hopping sequence)).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have modified the method of the combination of Flammer in view of Lee with the adjustment of channels of a frequency hopping sequence of Kim with a reasonable expectation of success. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification for the benefit of increasing communication reliability and reducing communication error rate (see Kim, page 5, pars. 8-10).
Regarding claim 22, the combination of Flammer in view of Lee, and further in view of Kim, teaches the method.
The combination of Flammer in view of Lee does not teach, but Kim teaches:
wherein the first communication protocol is a Bluetooth or Bluetooth Low Energy (BLE) protocol (see Kim, page 3, par. 17: The adaptive sequence generation 121 generates an adaptive frequency hopping sequence group to be used for future communication by storing a threshold value of the link quality index in advance for each hopping frequency and determining a group of channels satisfying the hopping frequency. If there is no hopping channel that satisfies this threshold because the link quality index is large, the next best option is to search for a group having the largest value among the hopping channels and randomly select one of them to select a hopping sequence. Will be constructed. Thereafter, communication 17 is performed using the generated new hopping frequency through a new protocol negotiation 16 between a master terminal and a slave terminal in Bluetooth; in this case, communication is taught via Bluetooth).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have modified the method of the combination of Flammer in view of Lee with the communication protocol being Bluetooth of Kim with a reasonable expectation of success. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification for the benefit of increasing communication reliability and reducing communication error rate (see Kim, page 5, pars. 8-10).
Claims 23-25 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Flammer in view of Lee, as applied to claims 1, 5, 13, and 28 above, and further in view of Gottimukkala et al. (US 2015/0071088), hereinafter “Gottimukkala”.
Regarding claim 23, the combination of Flammer in view of Lee teaches the method.
However, the combination of Flammer in view of Lee does not teach:
wherein the first upcoming transmission is associated with a first communication protocol, and wherein the first aggregate parameter is based on first parameters of transmissions of the device according to the first communication protocol and second parameters of transmissions of the device according to a second communication protocol.
Gottimukkala, in the same field of endeavor, teaches:
wherein the first upcoming transmission is associated with a first communication protocol (see Gottimukkala, par. [0012], lines 1-9: An embodiment includes a wireless communication device capable of interacting with a plurality of wireless networks, including a plurality of communication circuits, in which each communication circuit is associated with one or more active wireless communication subscriptions, a shared processor coupled to the communication circuits, in which the shared processor is configured with processor-executable instructions to perform operations including implementing a protocol stack for each active communication subscription, and see Gottimukkala, par. [0010], lines 1-9: Another embodiment method may further include affiliating a subscriber identification with a first wireless communication subscription implemented on the first communication circuit by the co-existence manager, in which the first future communication operation supports the first wireless communication subscription and the second future communication operation supports a second wireless communication subscription implemented on the second communication circuit, and see Gottimukkala, Fig. 1, par. [0037], lines 6-12: Cellular connections 132 and 142 may be made through two-way wireless communication links, such as 4G, 3G, CDMA, TDMA, WCDMA, GSM, and other mobile telephony communication technologies. Other connections may include various other wireless connections, including WLANs, such as Wi-Fi based on IEEE 802.11 standards, and wireless location services, such as GPS), and wherein the first aggregate parameter is based on first parameters of transmissions of the device according to the first communication protocol and second parameters of transmissions of the device according to a second communication protocol (see Gottimukkala, Fig. 4, par. [0056], lines 1-16: In block 406 the protocol stacks PS1, PS1 may provide the co-existence manager 228 with the operation registration data from the schedule of operations prior to the execution of the operations via the shared processor 216 (output A). The co-existence manager 228 may receive the operation registration data near in time to the execution of the operations such that the difference in time is mere milliseconds, or even microseconds. The operation registration data may include various data representing characteristics of the related operation. Some such data may include: the type (either Rx or Tx) of operation; time parameters for the operation, such as start time, end time, and/or duration; a priority indicator for the operation, which may indicate a priority of an operation and/or subscription over another operation and/or subscription; and technical parameters of the signal for the operation, such as frequency, channel, and/or format; in this case, parameters, including for subscriptions (i.e. subscriptions to at least a first and second protocol), are used for communication).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have modified the method of the combination of Flammer in view of Lee with the association with communication protocols of Gottimukkala with a reasonable expectation of success. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification for the benefit of reducing interference and service degradation issues stemming from co-existence issues (see Gottimukkala, par. [0033]).
Regarding claim 24, the combination of Flammer in view of Lee teaches the method.
However, the combination of Flammer in view of Lee does not teach:
wherein the first upcoming transmission is associated with a first protocol stack, and wherein the first aggregate parameter is based on first parameters of transmissions of the device according to the first protocol stack and second parameters of transmissions of the device according to a second protocol stack .
Gottimukkala, in the same field of endeavor, teaches:
wherein the first upcoming transmission is associated with a first protocol stack (see Gottimukkala, par. [0012], lines 1-9: An embodiment includes a wireless communication device capable of interacting with a plurality of wireless networks, including a plurality of communication circuits, in which each communication circuit is associated with one or more active wireless communication subscriptions, a shared processor coupled to the communication circuits, in which the shared processor is configured with processor-executable instructions to perform operations including implementing a protocol stack for each active communication subscription, and see Gottimukkala, par. [0010], lines 1-9: Another embodiment method may further include affiliating a subscriber identification with a first wireless communication subscription implemented on the first communication circuit by the co-existence manager, in which the first future communication operation supports the first wireless communication subscription and the second future communication operation supports a second wireless communication subscription implemented on the second communication circuit, and see Gottimukkala, Fig. 1, par. [0037], lines 6-12: Cellular connections 132 and 142 may be made through two-way wireless communication links, such as 4G, 3G, CDMA, TDMA, WCDMA, GSM, and other mobile telephony communication technologies. Other connections may include various other wireless connections, including WLANs, such as Wi-Fi based on IEEE 802.11 standards, and wireless location services, such as GPS), and wherein the first aggregate parameter is based on first parameters of transmissions of the device according to the first protocol stack and second parameters of transmissions of the device according to a second protocol stack (see Gottimukkala, Fig. 4, par. [0056], lines 1-16: In block 406 the protocol stacks PS1, PS1 may provide the co-existence manager 228 with the operation registration data from the schedule of operations prior to the execution of the operations via the shared processor 216 (output A). The co-existence manager 228 may receive the operation registration data near in time to the execution of the operations such that the difference in time is mere milliseconds, or even microseconds. The operation registration data may include various data representing characteristics of the related operation. Some such data may include: the type (either Rx or Tx) of operation; time parameters for the operation, such as start time, end time, and/or duration; a priority indicator for the operation, which may indicate a priority of an operation and/or subscription over another operation and/or subscription; and technical parameters of the signal for the operation, such as frequency, channel, and/or format; in this case, parameters, including for subscriptions (i.e. subscriptions to at least a first and second protocol stack), are used for communication).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have modified the method of the combination of Flammer in view of Lee with the association with communication protocol stacks of Gottimukkala with a reasonable expectation of success. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification for the benefit of reducing interference and service degradation issues stemming from co-existence issues (see Gottimukkala, par. [0033]).
Regarding claim 25, the combination of Flammer in view of Lee, and further in view of Gottimukkala, teaches the method.
The combination of Flammer in view of Lee does not teach, but Gottimukkala teaches:
wherein the first protocol stack corresponds to a first communication protocol and the second protocol stack corresponds to the first communication protocol (see Gottimukkala, par. [0012], lines 1-9: An embodiment includes a wireless communication device capable of interacting with a plurality of wireless networks, including a plurality of communication circuits, in which each communication circuit is associated with one or more active wireless communication subscriptions, a shared processor coupled to the communication circuits, in which the shared processor is configured with processor-executable instructions to perform operations including implementing a protocol stack for each active communication subscription, and see Gottimukkala, par. [0010], lines 1-9: Another embodiment method may further include affiliating a subscriber identification with a first wireless communication subscription implemented on the first communication circuit by the co-existence manager, in which the first future communication operation supports the first wireless communication subscription and the second future communication operation supports a second wireless communication subscription implemented on the second communication circuit, and see Gottimukkala, Fig. 1, par. [0037], lines 6-12: Cellular connections 132 and 142 may be made through two-way wireless communication links, such as 4G, 3G, CDMA, TDMA, WCDMA, GSM, and other mobile telephony communication technologies. Other connections may include various other wireless connections, including WLANs, such as Wi-Fi based on IEEE 802.11 standards, and wireless location services, such as GPS).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have modified the method of the combination of Flammer in view of Lee with the association of communication protocols with stacks of Gottimukkala with a reasonable expectation of success. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification for the benefit of reducing interference and service degradation issues stemming from co-existence issues (see Gottimukkala, par. [0033]).
Claim 26 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Flammer in view of Lee, as applied to claims 1, 5, 13, and 28 above, and further in view of Agardh, and further in view of Gottimukkala, and further in view of Karaki et al. (US 2024/0073788), hereinafter “Karaki”.
Regarding claim 26, the combination of Flammer in view of Lee teaches the method.
However, the combination of Flammer in view of Lee does not teach:
wherein the first upcoming transmission is associated with a first communication protocol, and wherein the device periodically performs transmissions in accordance with the first communication protocol every first time, the method further comprising, in response to determining that the first aggregate parameter exceeds the threshold parameter level, modifying the first time.
Agardh, in the same field of endeavor, teaches:
and wherein the device periodically performs transmissions in accordance with the first communication protocol every first time (see Agardh, par. [0009], lines 1-9: the aggregated information set characterizing future transmissions includes an indication of periodic time intervals that will be used for future transmission by the plurality of other devices. The aggregated information set may include an indication of respective channels related to the periodic time interval. The method may include transmitting the packet on a channel in a time slot that does not overlap the respective channels related to the periodic time intervals indicated by the aggregated set; in this case, future transmissions are indicated as being performed with periodic time intervals (corresponding to every first time)),
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have modified the method of the combination of Flammer in view of Lee with the periodic transmissions of Agardh with a reasonable expectation of success. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification for the benefit of alleviate collisions in communication (see Agardh, par. [0031]).
However, the combination of Flammer in view of Lee, and further in view of Agardh, does not teach:
wherein the first upcoming transmission is associated with a first communication protocol, the method further comprising, in response to determining that the first aggregate parameter exceeds the threshold parameter level, modifying the first time.
Gottimukkala, in the same field of endeavor, teaches:
wherein the first upcoming transmission is associated with a first communication protocol (see Gottimukkala, par. [0012], lines 1-9: An embodiment includes a wireless communication device capable of interacting with a plurality of wireless networks, including a plurality of communication circuits, in which each communication circuit is associated with one or more active wireless communication subscriptions, a shared processor coupled to the communication circuits, in which the shared processor is configured with processor-executable instructions to perform operations including implementing a protocol stack for each active communication subscription, and see Gottimukkala, par. [0010], lines 1-9: Another embodiment method may further include affiliating a subscriber identification with a first wireless communication subscription implemented on the first communication circuit by the co-existence manager, in which the first future communication operation supports the first wireless communication subscription and the second future communication operation supports a second wireless communication subscription implemented on the second communication circuit, and see Gottimukkala, Fig. 1, par. [0037], lines 6-12: Cellular connections 132 and 142 may be made through two-way wireless communication links, such as 4G, 3G, CDMA, TDMA, WCDMA, GSM, and other mobile telephony communication technologies. Other connections may include various other wireless connections, including WLANs, such as Wi-Fi based on IEEE 802.11 standards, and wireless location services, such as GPS),
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have modified the method of the combination of Flammer in view of Lee, and further in view of Agardh, with the association with communication protocols of Gottimukkala with a reasonable expectation of success. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification for the benefit of reducing interference and service degradation issues stemming from co-existence issues (see Gottimukkala, par. [0033]).
However, the combination of Flammer in view of Lee, and further in view of Agardh, and further in view of Gottimukkala, does not teach:
the method further comprising, in response to determining that the first aggregate parameter exceeds the threshold parameter level, modifying the first time.
Karaki, in the same field of endeavor, teaches:
the method further comprising, in response to determining that the first aggregate parameter exceeds the threshold parameter level, modifying the first time (see Karaki, par. [0128], lines 3-16: network node 115A can track the time duration since the last time it successfully received an UL transmission from wireless device 110A. Alternatively, wireless device 110A can monitor the fraction of UL resources for which collisions occur as measured by the detection of multiple DMRS patterns within a subframe. If any of the metrics above is larger than a certain threshold (i.e., wireless device 110A failed to access the channel due to high competition and long defer duration, or the number of collisions was very high), network node 115A can perform one or more of the following operations. As one example, network node 115A can dedicate certain resources (e.g., time and frequency) for wireless device 110A without overbooking the same resources to other wireless devices 110, and see Karaki, par. [0129], lines 1-2: The threshold for time between successful autonomous UL transmission can be set in any suitable manner; in this case, based on a metric exceeding a threshold, the node may dedicate time resources for autonomous transmission).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have modified the periodic transmission time of the combination of Flammer in view of Lee, and further in view of Agardh, and further in view of Gottimukkala, with the modifying the time based on exceeding a threshold of Karaki with a reasonable expectation of success. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification for the benefit of improving efficiency of LTE in the unlicensed spectrum and supporting spectral coexistence (see Karaki, par. [0059]).
Claim 27 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Flammer in view of Lee, as applied to claims 1, 5, 13, and 28 above, and further in view of Anders et al. (US 9,924,391), hereinafter “Anders”.
Regarding claim 27, the combination of Flammer in view of Lee teaches the method.
However, the combination of Flammer in view of Lee does not teach:
wherein the threshold parameter level is based on a government-regulated allowed utilization amount.
Anders, in the same field of endeavor, teaches:
wherein the threshold parameter level is based on a government-regulated allowed utilization amount (see Anders, col. 2, lines 27-39: users of the unlicensed band may be subject to regulations governing the detection of radar. Upon detection of a radar transmission, the users are to avoid corresponding channels, according to the regulations of the Federal Communications Commission. The detection criteria, such as pulse widths, pulse rates, and probability thresholds, were negotiated with the primary spectrum users, such as the military. A key parameter of the regulations is the probability threshold that dictates the number of samples and duration to clear a channel. The probability threshold regulation states that a device may use a channel if the probability of radar usage on a channel is below a set amount).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have modified the threshold parameter level of the combination of Flammer in view of Lee with the threshold being based on a government-regulated allowed utilization of Anders with a reasonable expectation of success. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification for the benefit of preventing public users from interfering with governmental actions (see Anders, col. 3, lines 52-64).
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claims 1 and 28 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure:
Badic et al. (US 2021/0120555) teaches methods for monitoring a frequency band, determining periods of a reduced interference, and communicating signals.
Barriac et al. (US 2016/0081031) teaches a method for measuring energy level of a transmission channel, comparing to a threshold, and reducing transmission power based on the comparison.
Lamy-Bergot et al. (US 2012/0309330) teaches a method for adaptive communication in an HF frequency band.
Obregon et al. (US 2019/0110310) teaches a method for performing an unscheduled uplink transmission by a user equipment UE, in an unlicensed portion of a radio spectrum.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to CALEB J BALLOWE whose telephone number is (571)270-0410. The examiner can normally be reached MON-FRI 7:30-5.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Nishant B. Divecha can be reached at (571) 270-3125. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of published or unpublished applications may be obtained from Patent Center. Unpublished application information in Patent Center is available to registered users. To file and manage patent submissions in Patent Center, visit: https://patentcenter.uspto.gov. Visit https://www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/patent-center for more information about Patent Center and https://www.uspto.gov/patents/docx for information about filing in DOCX format. For additional questions, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/C.J.B./Examiner, Art Unit 2419
/Nishant Divecha/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2419