DETAILED ACTION
This office action is a response to an application filed on 04/12/2024.
Claims 1-15 are pending for examination.
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application is being examined under the pre-AIA first to invent provisions.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) was filed. The submission is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
Priority
Acknowledgment is made of applicant’s claim for foreign priority under 35 U.S.C. 119 (a)-(d). The certified copy has been filed in parent Application.
Drawings
The Examiner contends that the drawings submitted on 04/12/2024 are acceptable for examination proceedings.
Specification
The title of the invention is not descriptive. A new title is required that is clearly indicative of the invention to which the claims are directed. The following title is suggested: “Wireless Communication Method and Device for Adaptive Frame Sizing and Quality-Based Link Handover”.
Claim Interpretation
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(f):
(f) Element in Claim for a Combination. – An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
As explained in MPEP § 2181, subsection I, claim limitations that meet the following three-prong test will be interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
(A) the claim limitation uses the term “means” or “step” or a term used as a substitute for “means” that is a generic placeholder (also called a nonce term or a non-structural term having no specific structural meaning) for performing the claimed function;
(B) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is modified by functional language, typically, but not always linked by the transition word “for” (e.g., “means for”) or another linking word or phrase, such as “configured to” or “so that”; and
(C) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is not modified by sufficient structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function.
Use of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim with functional language creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites sufficient structure, material, or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Absence of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is not to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is not interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites function without reciting sufficient structure, material or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Claim limitations in this application that use the word “means” (or “step”) are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action. Conversely, claim limitations in this application that do not use the word “means” (or “step”) are not being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action.
This application includes one or more claim limitations that do not use the word “means,” but are nonetheless being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, because the claim limitation(s) uses a generic placeholder that is coupled with functional language without reciting sufficient structure to perform the recited function and the generic placeholder is not preceded by a structural modifier.
Claim 11 disclosed limitations "generation function for generating”, “transmission function for transmitting” and a measurement function for measuring”, which are limitations that have been interpreted under 35 U.S.C.112 (f) or pre-AlA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph because it uses a generic placeholder coupled with functional language without reciting sufficient structure to achieve the function. Furthermore, the generic placeholder is not preceded by a structural modifier.
Because this/these claim limitation(s) is/are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, it/they is/are being interpreted to cover the corresponding structure described in the specification as performing the claimed function, and equivalents thereof.
If applicant does not intend to have this/these limitation(s) interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, applicant may: (1) amend the claim limitation(s) to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph (e.g., by reciting sufficient structure to perform the claimed function); or (2) present a sufficient showing that the claim limitation(s) recite(s) sufficient structure to perform the claimed function so as to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph.
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 set forth in Graham v. John Deere Co., 383 U.S. 1, 148 USPQ 459 (1966), that are applied for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103(a) 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 non-obviousness.
Claims 1- 15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Otting et al. (US 20020186675 A1), hereinafter “Otting”; and in further view of Vikberg et al. (US 20170318507 A1), hereinafter “Vikberg”.
Regarding claim 1, Otting teaches A wireless communication device comprising one or more memories storing instructions and one or more processors configured to execute the instructions to [Abstract; Fig. 4]:
generate a wireless communication frame [Fig. 3; Par. 29 illustrates adjustment module that adjust frame sized then stores frame x as current logical link control frame size in memory 328;
transmit the wireless communication frame via a first wireless link or a second wireless link [Par. 25 teaches mobile station 300 would then transmit the logical link control frame to cell 114 within 53 radio link control blocks]; and
the generation means changes a size of the wireless communication frame based on the first communication quality and the second communication quality, and generates the wireless communication frame having the changed size [Par. 28- 32 and 36- 40 teaches adjustment module 324 determines whether it is reselection pending signal 402, reselection complete signal 404, or reselection aborted signal 406, Step 514. If reselection pending signal 402 is received, the process returns to Step 510, and adjustment module 324 waits for receipt of reselection signals 402-406, Step 512. If it is determined in Step 514 that reselection complete signal 402 or reselection aborted signal 406 are received, adjustment module 324 sets the logical link control frame size to the previously stored value, Step 516, and mobile station 300 then transitions to the normal frame-size state, Step 518], and
PNG
media_image1.png
500
654
media_image1.png
Greyscale
However, Otting does not teach measure a first communication quality that is a communication quality of the first wireless link and a second communication quality that is a communication quality of the second wireless link, wherein
the first wireless link is a wireless link used for transmission of the wireless communication frame and the second wireless link is a wireless link having a possibility of being used for transmission of the wireless communication frame,
the transmission means switches a wireless link used for transmission of the wireless communication frame from the first wireless link to the second wireless link between completion of the transmission of the wireless communication frame and start of transmission of the next wireless communication frame based on the first communication quality and the second communication quality.
Nevertheless, Vikberg, in the similar filed of endeavor, teaches measure a first communication quality that is a communication quality of the first wireless link and a second communication quality that is a communication quality of the second wireless link [Vikberg: Par. 0042, 0043, the UE establishes and communicate using a main flow/one link, and the UE also establish multi- path backup path / a plurality of radio links, see also para. 0044-0045], wherein
the first wireless link is a wireless link used for transmission of the wireless communication frame and the second wireless link is a wireless link having a possibility of being used for transmission of the wireless communication frame [Vikberg: Fig. 14, para. 0065, the UE selecting a back-up path according to respective communication qualities of the plurality of radio links (the inspection of the payload of the packets or segments to recognize the type of traffic involved to determine a back-up link), the first candidate radio link/back-up path being candidate to which a switch is made from a radio link used for the communication],
the transmission means switches a wireless link used for transmission of the wireless communication frame from the first wireless link to the second wireless link between completion of the transmission of the wireless communication frame and start of transmission of the next wireless communication frame based on the first communication quality and the second communication quality [Vikberg: Fig. 13- 16; Par. 0064-0069, the UE has a function such that, when change of the status of the early indication of backup paths for already established radio links is provided / selecting a second candidate radio link, said change of the status is transmitted to the radio base station].
PNG
media_image2.png
626
458
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Thus it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill at the time the invention was made to utilize the teachings of Vikberg to provide backup path. One in the art would be motivated to utilize the teachings of Vikberg with a motivation to make this modification in order to provide indication to handover and priorities use of radio network [Vikberg: Par. 7].
Regarding claim 2, the combined Otting in view of Vikberg teaches all the limitations in the parent claim 1. Otting in view of Vikberg further teaches the changing the size of the wireless communication frame is performed by changing number of data frames to be stored in one wireless communication frame [Otting: Fig. 4; Par. 34- 36 teaches of frame size changes from x to x+1 to x+2 and x+3 which are stored in adjustment module].
Regarding claim 3, the combined Otting in view of Vikberg teaches all the limitations in the parent claim 1. Otting in view of Vikberg further teaches the size is increased in a case where the first communication quality is better than a predetermined threshold and there is no deterioration tendency [Otting: Par. 37 teaches the radio link control frame length could be adjusted to a “largest possible” size based on the estimated time remaining in the current cell, which in turn could be determined by signal strength].
Regarding claim 4, the combined Otting in view of Vikberg teaches all the limitations in the parent claim 1. Otting in view of Vikberg further teaches the size is reduced in a case where the first communication quality has deterioration tendency and the second communication quality has improvement tendency [Otting: Par. 29 teaches Adjustment module 324 then sets the logical link control frame length to a predetermined minimum value].
Regarding claim 5, the combined Otting in view of Vikberg teaches all the limitations in the parent claim 1. Otting in view of Vikberg further teaches the size is reduced in a case where a difference between the first communication quality and the second communication quality is smaller than a predetermined range [Otting: Fig. 5; Par. 38- 39].
Regarding claim 6, the claim is interpreted and rejected for the same reason as set forth for claim 1.
Regarding claim 7, the claim is interpreted and rejected for the same reason as set forth for claim 2.
Regarding claim 8, the claim is interpreted and rejected for the same reason as set forth for claim 3.
Regarding claim 9, the claim is interpreted and rejected for the same reason as set forth for claim 4.
Regarding claim 10, the claim is interpreted and rejected for the same reason as set forth for claim 5.
Regarding claim 11, Otting teaches A non-transitory computer-readable recording medium recorded with a wireless communication program for causing a computer to achieve [Abstract; Fig. 4]:
a generation function for generating a wireless communication frame [Fig. 3; Par. 29 illustrates adjustment module that adjust frame sized then stores frame x as current logical link control frame size in memory 328;
a transmission function for transmitting the wireless communication frame via a first wireless link or a second wireless link [Par. 25 teaches mobile station 300 would then transmit the logical link control frame to cell 114 within 53 radio link control blocks]; and
the generation function changes a size of the wireless communication frame based on the first communication quality and the second communication quality, and generates the wireless communication frame having the changed size [Par. 28- 32 and 36- 40 teaches adjustment module 324 determines whether it is reselection pending signal 402, reselection complete signal 404, or reselection aborted signal 406, Step 514. If reselection pending signal 402 is received, the process returns to Step 510, and adjustment module 324 waits for receipt of reselection signals 402-406, Step 512. If it is determined in Step 514 that reselection complete signal 402 or reselection aborted signal 406 are received, adjustment module 324 sets the logical link control frame size to the previously stored value, Step 516, and mobile station 300 then transitions to the normal frame-size state, Step 518], and
PNG
media_image1.png
500
654
media_image1.png
Greyscale
However, Otting does not teach a measurement function for measuring a first communication quality that is a communication quality of the first wireless link and a second communication quality that is a communication quality of the second wireless link, wherein
the first wireless link is a wireless link used for transmission of the wireless communication frame and the second wireless link is a wireless link having a possibility of being used for transmission of the wireless communication frame,
the transmission function switches a wireless link used for transmission of the wireless communication frame from the first wireless link to the second wireless link between completion of the transmission of the wireless communication frame and start of transmission of the next wireless communication frame based on the first communication quality and the second communication quality.
Nevertheless, Vikberg, in the similar filed of endeavor, a measurement function for measuring a first communication quality that is a communication quality of the first wireless link and a second communication quality that is a communication quality of the second wireless link [Vikberg: Par. 0042, 0043, the UE establishes and communicate using a main flow/one link, and the UE also establish multi- path backup path / a plurality of radio links, see also para. 0044-0045], wherein
the first wireless link is a wireless link used for transmission of the wireless communication frame and the second wireless link is a wireless link having a possibility of being used for transmission of the wireless communication frame [Vikberg: Fig. 14, para. 0065, the UE selecting a back-up path according to respective communication qualities of the plurality of radio links (the inspection of the payload of the packets or segments to recognize the type of traffic involved to determine a back-up link), the first candidate radio link/back-up path being candidate to which a switch is made from a radio link used for the communication],
the transmission function switches a wireless link used for transmission of the wireless communication frame from the first wireless link to the second wireless link between completion of the transmission of the wireless communication frame and start of transmission of the next wireless communication frame based on the first communication quality and the second communication quality [Vikberg: Fig. 13- 16; Par. 0064-0069, the UE has a function such that, when change of the status of the early indication of backup paths for already established radio links is provided / selecting a second candidate radio link, said change of the status is transmitted to the radio base station].
PNG
media_image2.png
626
458
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Thus it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill at the time the invention was made to utilize the teachings of Vikberg to provide backup path. One in the art would be motivated to utilize the teachings of Vikberg with a motivation to make this modification in order to provide indication to handover and priorities use of radio network [Vikberg: Par. 7].
Regarding claim 12, the claim is interpreted and rejected for the same reason as set forth for claim 2.
Regarding claim 13, the claim is interpreted and rejected for the same reason as set forth for claim 3.
Regarding claim 14, the claim is interpreted and rejected for the same reason as set forth for claim 4.
Regarding claim 15, the claim is interpreted and rejected for the same reason as set forth for claim 5.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record (see attached PTO-892) and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
A shortened statutory period for reply to this action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of the action. An extension of time may be obtained under 37 CFR 1.136(a). However, in no event, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to KYAW Z SOE whose telephone number is (571)270-0304. The examiner can normally be reached on 9am-5pm.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Charles C Jiang can be reached on 5712707191. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/KYAW Z SOE/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2412
Prosecution Insights