DETAILED ACTION
1. The following Office Action is based on the preliminary amendment filed on June 10, 2024, having claims 33-53 (claims 1-32 were canceled) and drawing figures 1-11.
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
2. The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Claim Objections
3. Claim 1 is objected to because of the following informalities:
The word “therefor” recited in line 2 of claim 1 must be deleted.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
4. 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 the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 48-50 and 52-53 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Jang et al. (EP 1 626 518 B1) (reference disclosed by applicant).
For claim 48, Jang discloses a method, comprising generating a block-acknowledgement -BA- frame (Fig 5, Block ACK frame), said generating including:
generating a first bitmap having a sequence of one-bit flags, each one of the one-bit flags of the sequence corresponding to a respective one of sections of sequence numbers of a plurality of data units (Fig 5, SN-level bitmap field is the first bitmap with N-octet sequence, b(0)-b(n) are the one-bit flags);
generating a second bitmap having encoded therein an acknowledgement status of each data unit of the plurality of data units (Fig 5, the erroneous SN bitmap field is the second bitmap); and arranging the first and second bitmaps in an information field of the block-acknowledgement frame (Fig 5, both bitmaps are included in the Block ACK frame);
wherein, for a one-bit flag of the sequence having a first binary value, the second bitmap has a corresponding segment of bits representing acknowledgement statuses of the data units of the respective one of the sections (Fig 5, first bitmap has one-bit flag indicating same ACK status for the data units in the section); and wherein, for a one-bit flag of the sequence having a second binary value, the second bitmap does not have a corresponding segment of bits (Fig 5, second bitmap depends on number m of erroneously received packets).
For claims 49 and 53, Jang discloses for the one-bit flag having the second binary value, all of the data units of the respective one of the sections have a same acknowledgement status (Fig 5, first bitmap has one-bit flag indicating same ACK status for the data units in the section).
For claim 50, Jang discloses selecting a binary value for a control bit of the information field to indicate interpretation of binary "0s" and "1s" of the second bitmap in terms of the acknowledgement status (Fig 5, bit (0) means reception failure or “not received” or bit (1) means reception success or “Received”).
For claim 52, Jang discloses decoding a received block-acknowledgement -BA- frame (Fig 5, Block ACK frame) to determine acknowledgement statuses of a transmitted plurality of data units, said decoding including:
reading a first bitmap of an information field of the block-acknowledgement frame, the first bitmap having a sequence of one-bit flags (Fig 5, the one-bit flags correspond to number of ACK-able sequences representing data units that are correctly received), each one of the one-bit flags of the sequence corresponding to a respective one of sections of sequence numbers of the plurality of data units (Fig 5, SN-level bitmap field is the first bitmap with N-octet sequence, b(0)-b(n) are the one-bit flags); and
decoding a second bitmap of the information field, the second bitmap having encoded therein an acknowledgement status of each one of the plurality of data units (Fig 5, the erroneous SN bitmap field is the second bitmap);
wherein, for a one-bit flag of the sequence having a first binary value (Fig 5, the one-bit flags correspond to number of ACK-able sequences representing data units that are correctly received), the second bitmap has a corresponding segment of bits representing the acknowledgement statuses of the data units of the respective one of the sections (Fig 5, first bitmap has one-bit flag indicating same ACK status for the data units in the section); and wherein, for a one-bit flag of the sequence having a second binary value, the second bitmap does not have a corresponding segment of bits (Fig 5, second bitmap depends on number m of erroneously received packets).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
5. 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 33-47 and 51 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ding et al. (US 2016/0100421 A1) in view of Jang et al. (EP 1 626 518 B1) (reference disclosed by applicant).
For claim 33, Ding discloses an apparatus (Fig 13, wireless device 1300), comprising a wireless transceiver (Fig 13, transceiver 1346) and a processor (Fig 13, processor 1310) connected to the wireless transceiver to generate therefor a block-acknowledgement -BA- frame in response to a plurality of data units [0093] externally wirelessly transmitted to the wireless transceiver, the block-acknowledgement frame (Fig 6, BA frame 600), including a block-acknowledgement information field (Fig 6, BA information field 612).
For claim 33, Ding does not expressly disclose the block-acknowledgement information field comprises: a first bitmap having a sequence of one-bit flags, each one of the one-bit flags of the sequence corresponding to a respective one of sections of sequence numbers of the plurality of data units; and a second bitmap having encoded therein an acknowledgement status of each data unit of the plurality of data units; wherein, for a one-bit flag of the sequence having a first binary value, the second bitmap has a corresponding segment of bits representing acknowledgement statuses of the data units of the respective one of the sections; and wherein, for a one-bit flag of the sequence having a second binary value, the second bitmap does not have a corresponding segment of bits.
Jang, from the same or similar field of endeavor, teaches the block-acknowledgement information field comprises: a first bitmap having a sequence of one-bit flags (Fig 5, SN-level bitmap field is the first bitmap with N-octet sequence, b(0)-b(n) are the one-bit flags), each one of the one-bit flags of the sequence corresponding to a respective one of sections of sequence numbers of the plurality of data units (Fig 5, the one-bit flags correspond to number of ACK-able sequences representing data units that are correctly received); and
a second bitmap having encoded therein an acknowledgement status of each data unit of the plurality of data units (Fig 5, the erroneous SN bitmap field is the second bitmap); wherein, for a one-bit flag of the sequence having a first binary value, the second bitmap has a corresponding segment of bits representing acknowledgement statuses of the data units of the respective one of the sections (Fig 5, first bitmap has one-bit flag indicating same ACK status for the data units in the section); and wherein, for a one-bit flag of the sequence having a second binary value, the second bitmap does not have a corresponding segment of bits (Fig 5, second bitmap depends on number m of erroneously received packets).
For claims 34 and 42, Jang discloses for the one-bit flag having the second binary value, all of the data units of the respective one of the sections have a same acknowledgement status (Fig 5, first bitmap has one-bit flag indicating same ACK status for the data units in the section).
For claims 35 and 43, Jang discloses the same acknowledgement status is "received" or is "not received” (Fig 5, bit (0) means reception failure or “not received” or bit (1) means reception success or “Received”).
For claim 36, Jang discloses the second bitmap has a variable length (Fig 5, the second bitmap for erroneous SN packet has a variable length based on the value of m).
For claim 37, Jang discloses the BA information field further comprises a first segment-control subfield having encoded therein a maximum length of the data units ([0111] BAR control field indicates the number (m) of MSDUs and maximum number of Frag. packets Field).
For claims 38 and 45, Jang discloses the BA information field comprises a control bit whose binary value determines interpretation of binary "0s" and "1s" of the second bitmap in terms of the acknowledgement status (Fig 5, bit (0) means reception failure or “not received” or bit (1) means reception success or “Received”).
For claims 39 and 46, Ding discloses the apparatus is an access point ([0091] the BA frame is transmitted by a wireless access point to one or more wireless devices).
For claims 40 and 47, Ding discloses the apparatus is a non-access-point station ([0089] the apparatus may be a wireless device (STA) which is a non-access point).
For claim 41, Ding discloses an apparatus (Fig 13, wireless device 1300), comprising a wireless transceiver (Fig 13, transceiver 1346) and a processor (Fig 13, processor 1310) connected to the wireless transceiver to determine acknowledgement statuses of a transmitted plurality of data units [0093] based on a received block-acknowledgement -BA- frame (Fig 6, BA frame 600), which includes a block-acknowledgement information field (Fig 6, BA information field 612).
For claim 41, Ding does not expressly disclose the block-acknowledgement information field comprises: a first bitmap having a sequence of one-bit flags, each one of the one-bit flags of the sequence corresponding to a respective one of sections of sequence numbers of the plurality of data units; and a second bitmap having encoded therein an acknowledgement status of each data unit of the plurality of data units; wherein, for a one-bit flag of the sequence having a first binary value, the second bitmap has a corresponding segment of bits representing acknowledgement statuses of the data units of the respective one of the sections; and wherein, for a one-bit flag of the sequence having a second binary value, the second bitmap does not have a corresponding segment of bits.
Jang, from the same or similar field of endeavor, teaches the block-acknowledgement information field comprises: a first bitmap having a sequence of one-bit flags (Fig 5, SN-level bitmap field is the first bitmap with N-octet sequence, b(0)-b(n) are the one-bit flags), each one of the one-bit flags of the sequence corresponding to a respective one of sections of sequence numbers of the plurality of data units (Fig 5, the one-bit flags correspond to number of ACK-able sequences representing data units that are correctly received); and
a second bitmap having encoded therein an acknowledgement status of each data unit of the plurality of data units (Fig 5, the erroneous SN bitmap field is the second bitmap); wherein, for a one-bit flag of the sequence having a first binary value, the second bitmap has a corresponding segment of bits representing acknowledgement statuses of the data units of the respective one of the sections (Fig 5, first bitmap has one-bit flag indicating same ACK status for the data units in the section); and wherein, for a one-bit flag of the sequence having a second binary value, the second bitmap does not have a corresponding segment of bits (Fig 5, second bitmap depends on number m of erroneously received packets).
For claim 44, Jang discloses the second bitmap has a variable length, and wherein the BA information field further comprises a first segment-control subfield having encoded therein a maximum length of the data units ([0111] BAR control field indicates the number (m) of MSDUs and maximum number of Frag. Field).
For claim 51, Ding discloses transmitting the BA frame using a wireless transmitter ([0091] the BA frame is transmitted by a wireless access point to one or more wireless devices).
Conclusion
6. The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. See PTO-892 form.
7. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Elisabeth B Magloire whose telephone number is (571)272-5601. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8 AM-5 PM ET.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Sujoy K Kundu can be reached at 571-272-8586. 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.
/ELISABETH BENOIT MAGLOIRE/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2471
Prosecution Insights