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 .
DETAILED ACTION
This office action is in response to the RCE filed 5/19/2026 in which Claims 1-3, 5-17, 19, 20 are pending.
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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 5/19/2026 has been entered.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 1, 15 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.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, 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 text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
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.
Claim(s) 1-3, 11, 15-17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103(a) as being unpatentable over U.S. Patent Publication 2023/0249506 to Haslam et al (“Haslam”) in view of U.S. Patent 2007/0076595 to Lee et al (“Lee”).
As to Claim 1, Haslam teaches a method for data communication, comprising: monitoring, via a first device of a vehicle, communications traffic on a power line to receive a first payload originating from a second device of the vehicle and targeted to a third device of the vehicle (existing trailer modules to receive data over the PLC interface from one trailer away, i.e., the next following trailer, and to act as a repeater for that data to the tractor module…a software protocol that appends data sent by any trailer module to its own message that is sent forward to a next trailer module in the series, until all the appended messages are delivered to the tractor module, see ¶ 0082; the tractor 122 is pulling three trailers (112-1, 112-2 and 112-3, 112 collectively) connected in series, see ¶ 0083; Each trailer module 1010 is able to transmit data at least forward to a leading trailer. In the illustrated example, trailer 112-2 is leading trailer to trailer 112-3; and trailer 112-3 is a following trailer to trailer 112-2, etc, see ¶ 0084; The trailer module 1010-3 of the rearmost trailer 112-3 may generate a data message [a first payload originating from trailer 112-3, e.g. second device, of the vehicle]. This message may be generated periodically, on command or in response to the occurrence of specific event, such as connection of the trailer 112-3 to the power line carrier 460...The message may have an electronic header that indicates the trailer from which the message originated along with a data payload of the data being transmitted, see ¶ 0087; Using the power line carrier 460, this message is transmitted to and received by the trailer module 1010-2 in the trailer 112-2 that is leading the trailer 112-3 that originated the message [communications traffic on a power line to receive a first payload originating from trailer 112-3, e.g. second device, and received by trailer 112-2, e.g. first device, of the vehicle]. This trailer module 1010-2 can simply forward the message to the next forward trailer module 1010-1 or may append the message to a data message of its own [a first payload targeted to trailer 112-1, e.g. third device], see ¶ 0088; the method 1100 beings with a trailer module, as described above, receiving 1101 a data message with an identification header (ID header) from a following trailer. As noted above, the module determines 1102 whether to add further data to the message [monitors, via trailer 112-2, e.g. first device]…If more data is to be added, the module will append 1103 the data received from the following trailer with the corresponding identification header to its own message including its ID header and data payload [targeted to trailer 112-1, e.g. third device, communications traffic received from a 112-3, e.g. second device], see ¶ 0092. Examiner construes that trailer 112-2 monitors the message received from trailer 112-3 which is targeted to trailer 112-1);
generating, via the first device, a data unit including the first payload to relay the first payload to the third device of the vehicle (This trailer module 1010-2 can simply forward the message to the next forward trailer module 1010-1 or may append the message to a data message of its own [relay first payload to trailer 112-1, e.g. third device], see ¶ 0088); and sending the data unit on the power line (Using the power line carrier 460, this message is transmitted to and received by the trailer module 1010-2 in the trailer 112-2 that is leading the trailer 112-3 that originated the message, see ¶ 0088).
Haslam does not expressly disclose wherein the communications traffic on the power line is monitored to identify whether to relay the first payload based on one or more conditions being met including a channel quality associated with the power line in the vehicle being below a first threshold.
Lee teaches wherein the communications traffic on the power line is monitored to identify whether to relay the first payload based on one or more conditions being met including a channel quality associated with the power line in the vehicle being below a first threshold (there may be an electrical outlet in a position having a poor communication state due to a wiring structure on the premises or load generated in a cabinet panel. In this case, a repeater function used in an access network may be a solution for this problem. However, when a repeater is simply used, a specific communication device should communicate via the repeater all the time, and thus communication devices, though being capable of efficiently communicating with each other without using the repeater, are likely to perform communication via the repeater. In this case, by using the repeater, communication efficiency is degraded. Therefore, there is a need for a technique capable of selectively repeating communication between communication devices having link qualities that are lower than a threshold level, see ¶ 0006; the power line communication apparatus including a determining unit to automatically determine whether the destination station can directly communicate with the power line communication apparatus, and a transmitting unit to selectively transmit the data packet directly or indirectly to the destination station based on the determination of the determining unit, see ¶ 0013; The at least one station may selectively transmit a data packet to a destination station of the plurality of power line communication stations via the repeating unit when the measured link quality of the destination station does not satisfy the predetermined threshold condition. The repeating unit may periodically measure the link qualities of the plurality of power line communication stations, and may manage the addresses and the link qualities of the plurality of power line communication stations. The at least one station may selectively transmit a data packet to a destination station of the plurality of power line communication stations via the repeating unit when the address and link quality of the destination station is not managed by the at least one station and is managed by the repeating unit, see ¶ 0017).
Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify Haslam with Lee to teach wherein the communications traffic on the power line is monitored to identify whether to relay the first payload based on one or more conditions being met including a channel quality associated with the power line in the vehicle being below a first threshold. The suggestion/motivation would have been in order to determine whether directly communicating data packets to a destination communication apparatus should be performed based on information determined with respect to the destination communication apparatus, and transmit the data packets to either the destination communication apparatus or to a repeater based on the determined information (see ¶ 0019).
As to Claim 2, Haslam and Lee depending on Claim 1, Haslam teaches generating a second payload to be sent on the power line, wherein the data unit further includes the second payload, and wherein the second payload is targeted to a fourth device different than the third device (If more data is to be added [second payload], the module will append 1103 the data received from the following trailer with the corresponding identification header to its own message including its ID header and data payload. The resulting combined message is the transmitted 1104 [second payload targeted to a fourth device different than the third device] to either the next trailer forward or to the tractor module if there is no leading trailer, see ¶ 0092).
As to Claim 3, Haslam and Lee depending on Claim 1, Haslam teaches wherein the power line is part of an automobile power line communication (PLC) network (The communication system includes a trailer module disposed on a cargo trailer…The tractor module includes a power line transceiver for communicating along the power line carrier communication network, see ¶ 0023).
As to Claim 11, Haslam and Leedepending on Claim 1, Haslam teaches wherein the communications traffic on the power line is monitored to further receive a second payload targeted to the third device or a fourth device, the data unit further including the second payload (If more data is to be added [second payload], the module will append 1103 the data received from the following trailer with the corresponding identification header to its own message including its ID header and data payload. The resulting combined message is the transmitted 1104 [second payload targeted to a fourth device different than the third device] to either the next trailer forward or to the tractor module if there is no leading trailer, see ¶ 0092).
As to Claim 15, Haslam teaches an apparatus for data communication, comprising: one or more memories; and one or more processors coupled to the one or more memories (The computer (924) may be physically connected to the tractor module (120) using a port. The computer (924) may communicate wirelessly with the tractor module (120). The computer (924) includes a processor and a coupled, associated memory, see ¶ 0079) and configured to: monitor, via a first device of a vehicle, communications traffic on a power line to receive a first payload originating from a second device of the vehicle and targeted to a third device of the vehicle (existing trailer modules to receive data over the PLC interface from one trailer away, i.e., the next following trailer, and to act as a repeater for that data to the tractor module…a software protocol that appends data sent by any trailer module to its own message that is sent forward to a next trailer module in the series, until all the appended messages are delivered to the tractor module, see ¶ 0082; the tractor 122 is pulling three trailers (112-1, 112-2 and 112-3, 112 collectively) connected in series, see ¶ 0083; Each trailer module 1010 is able to transmit data at least forward to a leading trailer. In the illustrated example, trailer 112-2 is leading trailer to trailer 112-3; and trailer 112-3 is a following trailer to trailer 112-2, etc, see ¶ 0084; The trailer module 1010-3 of the rearmost trailer 112-3 may generate a data message [a first payload originating from trailer 112-3, e.g. second device, of the vehicle]. This message may be generated periodically, on command or in response to the occurrence of specific event, such as connection of the trailer 112-3 to the power line carrier 460...The message may have an electronic header that indicates the trailer from which the message originated along with a data payload of the data being transmitted, see ¶ 0087; Using the power line carrier 460, this message is transmitted to and received by the trailer module 1010-2 in the trailer 112-2 that is leading the trailer 112-3 that originated the message [communications traffic on a power line to receive a first payload originating from trailer 112-3, e.g. second device, and received by trailer 112-2, e.g. first device, of the vehicle]. This trailer module 1010-2 can simply forward the message to the next forward trailer module 1010-1 or may append the message to a data message of its own [a first payload targeted to trailer 112-1, e.g. third device], see ¶ 0088; the method 1100 beings with a trailer module, as described above, receiving 1101 a data message with an identification header (ID header) from a following trailer. As noted above, the module determines 1102 whether to add further data to the message [monitors, via trailer 112-2, e.g. first device]…If more data is to be added, the module will append 1103 the data received from the following trailer with the corresponding identification header to its own message including its ID header and data payload [targeted to trailer 112-1, e.g. third device, communications traffic received from a 112-3, e.g. second device], see ¶ 0092. Examiner construes that trailer 112-2 monitors the message received from trailer 112-3 which is targeted to trailer 112-1); generate, via the first device, a data unit including the first payload to relay the first payload to the third device; and send the data unit on the power line (This trailer module 1010-2 can simply forward the message to the next forward trailer module 1010-1 or may append the message to a data message of its own [relay first payload to trailer 112-1, e.g. third device], see ¶ 0088); and sending the data unit on the power line (Using the power line carrier 460, this message is transmitted to and received by the trailer module 1010-2 in the trailer 112-2 that is leading the trailer 112-3 that originated the message, see ¶ 0088).
Haslam does not expressly disclose wherein the communications traffic on the power line is monitored to identify whether to relay the first payload based on one or more conditions being met including a channel quality associated with the power line in the vehicle being below a threshold.
Lee teaches wherein the communications traffic on the power line is monitored to identify whether to relay the first payload based on one or more conditions being met including a channel quality associated with the power line in the vehicle being below a threshold (there may be an electrical outlet in a position having a poor communication state due to a wiring structure on the premises or load generated in a cabinet panel. In this case, a repeater function used in an access network may be a solution for this problem. However, when a repeater is simply used, a specific communication device should communicate via the repeater all the time, and thus communication devices, though being capable of efficiently communicating with each other without using the repeater, are likely to perform communication via the repeater. In this case, by using the repeater, communication efficiency is degraded. Therefore, there is a need for a technique capable of selectively repeating communication between communication devices having link qualities that are lower than a threshold level, see ¶ 0006; the power line communication apparatus including a determining unit to automatically determine whether the destination station can directly communicate with the power line communication apparatus, and a transmitting unit to selectively transmit the data packet directly or indirectly to the destination station based on the determination of the determining unit, see ¶ 0013; The at least one station may selectively transmit a data packet to a destination station of the plurality of power line communication stations via the repeating unit when the measured link quality of the destination station does not satisfy the predetermined threshold condition. The repeating unit may periodically measure the link qualities of the plurality of power line communication stations, and may manage the addresses and the link qualities of the plurality of power line communication stations. The at least one station may selectively transmit a data packet to a destination station of the plurality of power line communication stations via the repeating unit when the address and link quality of the destination station is not managed by the at least one station and is managed by the repeating unit, see ¶ 0017).
Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify Haslam with Lee to teach wherein the communications traffic on the power line is monitored to identify whether to relay the first payload based on one or more conditions being met including a channel quality associated with the power line in the vehicle being below a first threshold. The suggestion/motivation would have been in order to determine whether directly communicating data packets to a destination communication apparatus should be performed based on information determined with respect to the destination communication apparatus, and transmit the data packets to either the destination communication apparatus or to a repeater based on the determined information (see ¶ 0019).
As to Claim 16, Haslam and Lee depending on Claim 15, Haslam teaches wherein the one or more processors are further configured to generate a second payload to be sent on the power line, wherein the data unit further includes the second payload (If more data is to be added [second payload], the module will append 1103 the data received from the following trailer with the corresponding identification header to its own message including its ID header and data payload. The resulting combined message is the transmitted 1104 [second payload targeted to a fourth device different than the third device] to either the next trailer forward or to the tractor module if there is no leading trailer, see ¶ 0092).
As to Claim 17, Haslam and Lee depending on Claim 16, Haslam teaches wherein the second payload is targeted to a fourth device different than the third device (If more data is to be added [second payload], the module will append 1103 the data received from the following trailer with the corresponding identification header to its own message including its ID header and data payload. The resulting combined message is the transmitted 1104 [second payload targeted to a fourth device different than the third device] to either the next trailer forward or to the tractor module if there is no leading trailer, see ¶ 0092).
Claim(s) 6, 9, 10, 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over U.S. Patent Publication 2023/0249506 to Haslam et al (“Haslam”) in view of U.S. Patent 2007/0076595 to Lee et al (“Lee”) in further view of “Narrow-band OFDM Power Line Communication Transceivers – Data Link Layer Specification”, ITU-T Draftm Study Period 2013-2016, International Telecommunications Union, Geneva, CH, Vol. 4/15, 22 December 2011, pp. 1-371 to ITU.
As to Claim 6, Haslam and Lee depending on Claim 1, Haslam and Lee do not expressly disclose wherein: the first payload is one of a plurality of payloads received by the first device; and the method further comprises selecting, from the plurality of payloads, the first payload to be relayed based on one or more other conditions associated with the first payload. ITU teaches wherein: the first payload is one of a plurality of payloads received by the first device; and the method further comprises selecting, from the plurality of payloads, the first payload to be relayed based on one or more other conditions associated with the first payload (If a node assigned as a domain relay receives an LLC frame [first payload] containing a mesh header, and the receiving node is not the final destination node (i.e. the address of the receiving node does not match the value indicated on the final address field DA of the mesh header), and the NODE_ID of the node the LLC frame was sent to or received from meets the relaying database [selecting the first payload to be relayed based on a condition], the receiving node shall perform the following relaying procedure, see Sec. 8.3.2.2.1.2, 1st para).
Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify Haslam and Lee with ITU to teach wherein: the first payload is one of a plurality of payloads received by the first device; and the method further comprises selecting, from the plurality of payloads, the first payload to be relayed based on one or more other conditions associated with the first payload. The suggestion/motivation would have been in order to reach the node matching the final address field indicated on the mesh header (see Sec. 8.3.2.2.1.2, 4th para).
As to Claim 9, Haslam and Lee depending on Claim 6, Haslam does not expressly disclose further comprising maintaining a list of devices to support for payload relaying, wherein the one or more conditions comprises whether the second device is part of the list of devices. ITU teaches further comprising maintaining a list of devices to support for payload relaying, wherein the one or more conditions comprises whether the second device is part of the list of devices (If a node assigned as a domain relay receives an LLC frame containing a mesh header, and the receiving node is not the final destination node (i.e. the address of the receiving node does not match the value indicated on the final address field DA of the mesh header), and the NODE_ID of the node the LLC frame was sent to or received from meets the relaying database, the receiving node shall perform the following relaying procedure, see Sec. 8.3.2.2.1.2, 1st para).
As to Claim 10, Haslam and Lee depending on Claim 1, Haslam teaches wherein the first device is a dedicated relay device (a node assigned as a domain relay receives an LLC frame containing a mesh header, see Sec 8.3.2.2.1.2, 1st para).
As to Claim 20, Haslam and Lee depending on Claim 15, Haslam and Lee do not expressly disclose wherein: the first payload is one of a plurality of payloads received by the first device; and the one or more processors are further configured to select, from the plurality of payloads, the first payload to be relayed based on one or more conditions associated with the payload. ITU teaches wherein: the first payload is one of a plurality of payloads received by the first device; and the one or more processors are further configured to select, from the plurality of payloads, the first payload to be relayed based on one or more conditions associated with the payload (If a node assigned as a domain relay receives an LLC frame [first payload] containing a mesh header, and the receiving node is not the final destination node (i.e. the address of the receiving node does not match the value indicated on the final address field DA of the mesh header), and the NODE_ID of the node the LLC frame was sent to or received from meets the relaying database [selecting the first payload to be relayed based on a condition], the receiving node shall perform the following relaying procedure, see Sec. 8.3.2.2.1.2, 1st para).
Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify Haslam and Lee with ITU to teach wherein: the first payload is one of a plurality of payloads received by the first device; and the one or more processors are further configured to select, from the plurality of payloads, the first payload to be relayed based on one or more conditions associated with the payload. The suggestion/motivation would have been in order to reach the node matching the final address field indicated on the mesh header (see Sec. 8.3.2.2.1.2, 4th para).
Claim(s) 5, 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over U.S. Patent Publication 2023/0249506 to Haslam et al (“Haslam”) in view of U.S. Patent 2007/0076595 to Lee et al (“Lee”) in further view of U.S. Patent Publication 2015/0085883 to Vijayasankar et al (“Vijayasankar”).
As to Claim 5, Haslam and Lee depending on Claim 1, Haslam and Nishizak do not expressly disclose wherein the one or more conditions comprise: a signal strength on the power line being below a signal strength threshold; a level of congestion associated with the communications traffic on the power line; whether a size of a payload generated by the first device to be included in the data unit is less than a payload size threshold; or a state of the vehicle including the power line. Vijayasankar teaches wherein the one or more conditions comprise: a signal strength on the power line being below a signal strength threshold; a level of congestion associated with the communications traffic on the power line; whether a size of a payload generated by the first device to be included in the data unit is less than a payload size threshold; or a state of the vehicle including the power line (each PLC device involved in a communication may select (or allow another device to assign) good or best communication channels or subbands, for example, based upon a determination of channel conditions (e.g., signal-to-noise ratio (SNR) measurements, congestion indicators, etc.) or the like, see ¶ 0045).
Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify Haslam and Lee and Vijayasankar to teach wherein the one or more conditions comprise: a signal strength on the power line being below a signal strength threshold; a level of congestion associated with the communications traffic on the power line; whether a size of a payload generated by the first device to be included in the data unit is less than a payload size threshold; or a state of the vehicle including the power line. The suggestion/motivation would have been in order to select good or best communication channels or subbands based upon a determination of channel conditions (see ¶ 0045).
As to Claim 19, Haslam and Lee depending on Claim 15, Haslam and Lee do not expressly disclose wherein the one or more conditions comprise: a signal strength on the power line being below a signal strength threshold; a level of congestion associated with the communications traffic on the power line; whether a size of a payload generated by the first device to be included in the data unit is less than a payload size threshold; or a state of the vehicle including the power line. Vijayasankar teaches wherein the one or more conditions comprise: a signal strength on the power line being below a signal strength threshold; a level of congestion associated with the communications traffic on the power line; whether a size of a payload generated by the first device to be included in the data unit is less than a payload size threshold; or a state of the vehicle including the power line (each PLC device involved in a communication may select (or allow another device to assign) good or best communication channels or subbands, for example, based upon a determination of channel conditions (e.g., signal-to-noise ratio (SNR) measurements, congestion indicators, etc.) or the like, see ¶ 0045).
Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify Haslam and Lee with Vijayasankar to teach wherein the one or more conditions comprise: a signal strength on the power line being below a signal strength threshold; a level of congestion associated with the communications traffic on the power line; whether a size of a payload generated by the first device to be included in the data unit is less than a payload size threshold; or a state of the vehicle including the power line. The suggestion/motivation would have been in order to select good or best communication channels or subbands based upon a determination of channel conditions (see ¶ 0045).
Claim(s) 7, 8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over U.S. Patent Publication 2023/0249506 to Haslam et al (“Haslam”) in view of U.S. Patent 2007/0076595 to Lee et al (“Lee”) in further view of “Narrow-band OFDM Power Line Communication Transceivers – Data Link Layer Specification”, ITU-T Draftm Study Period 2013-2016, International Telecommunications Union, Geneva, CH, Vol. 4/15, 22 December 2011, pp. 1-371 to ITU and in further view of U.S. Patent Publication 2009/0278708 to Kelley et al (“Kelley”).
As to Claim 7, Haslam, Lee and ITU depending on Claim 6, Haslam, Lee and ITU do not expressly disclose wherein the one or more conditions includes whether a direct path exists between the first device and the second device. Kelley teaches wherein the one or more conditions includes whether a direct path exists between the first device and the second device (Each bi-directional node [first device] may have a wireless communication path to one of the central nodes [second device] that is either a direct path or an indirect path through one or more intermediate bi-directional nodes serving as relays, see Abstract; The new communication path is a direct or indirect (e.g., via relay nodes) path to an operable central node through zero or more operable relay nodes, see ¶ 0105).
Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify Haslam, Lee and ITU with Kelley to teach wherein the one or more conditions includes whether a direct path exists between the first device and the second device. The suggestion/motivation would have been in order for the system device to communicate with the control node (see ¶ 0001).
As to Claim 8, Haslam, Lee, ITU and Kelley depending on Claim 7, Kelley teaches wherein the direct path comprises a path that does not pass through a power source (Each bi-directional node [first device] may have a wireless communication path to one of the central nodes [second device] that is either a direct path or an indirect path through one or more intermediate bi-directional nodes serving as relays, see Abstract; The new communication path is a direct or indirect (e.g., via relay nodes) path to an operable central node through zero or more operable relay nodes, see ¶ 0105. Figure 7 illustrates a direct path between the bi-directional node and central node without a power source).
Claim(s) 12 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over U.S. Patent Publication 2023/0249506 to Haslam et al (“Haslam”) in view of U.S. Patent 2007/0076595 to Lee et al (“Lee”) in further view of U.S. Patent 9,667,756 to Koo et al (“Koo”).
As to Claim 12, Haslam and Lee depending on Claim 11, Haslam and Lee do not expressly disclose further comprising performing an exclusive OR (XOR) operation on the first payload and the second payload to yield XOR data, wherein including the first payload and the second payload in the data unit comprises including the XOR data in the data unit. Koo teaches further comprising performing an exclusive OR (XOR) operation on the first payload and the second payload to yield XOR data, wherein including the first payload and the second payload in the data unit comprises including the XOR data in the data unit (Figure 1 illustrates XOR frame 170 in the data packet; Figure 2 illustrates XOR frame 280 [XOR data], having fields XOR1 282 and XOR2 284, that generate a data packet formed by performing an XOR operation on main frame 210 and redundancy frame 250).
Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify Haslam and Lee with Koo to teach further comprising performing an exclusive OR (XOR) operation on the first payload and the second payload to yield XOR data, wherein including the first payload and the second payload in the data unit comprises including the XOR data in the data unit. The suggestion/motivation would have been in order to include the main frame, the redundancy frame and the XOR frame into the payload (see Col. 4, lines 47-49).
Claim(s) 13 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over U.S. Patent Publication 2023/0249506 to Haslam et al (“Haslam”) in view of U.S. Patent 2007/0076595 to Lee et al (“Lee”) in further view of U.S. Patent Publication 2012/0189042 to Varadarajan et al (“Varadarajan”).
As to Claim 13, Haslam and Lee depending on Claim 1, Haslam and Lee do not expressly disclose further comprising selecting a first robust mode from a plurality of robust modes to send the data unit, the plurality of robust modes being associated with different numbers of code repetitions, wherein the first robust mode has fewer code repetitions than a second robust mode of the plurality of robust modes. Varadarajan teaches further comprising selecting a first robust mode from a plurality of robust modes to send the data unit, the plurality of robust modes being associated with different numbers of code repetitions, wherein the first robust mode has fewer code repetitions than a second robust mode of the plurality of robust modes (a given robust mode of operation may include adding bit-level repetition (e.g., 4-bit or 2-bit) [different numbers of code repetitions where one robust mode has fewer code repetitions than the other robust mode], see ¶ 0056; Therefore, with respect to the types of payload that may be used, a first robust protocol may use a robust header portion (e.g., 702) and a "normal" payload portion (e.g., 703), and a second robust mode may use both a robust header portion (e.g., 702) and a robust payload portion (e.g., 704), see ¶ 0044).
Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify Haslam and Lee with Varadarajan to teach further comprising selecting a first robust mode from a plurality of robust modes to send the data unit, the plurality of robust modes being associated with different numbers of code repetitions, wherein the first robust mode has fewer code repetitions than a second robust mode of the plurality of robust modes. The suggestion/motivation would have been in order to provide one or more robust modes of operation that may enable more reliable communications in severe channel environments (see ¶ 0042).
Claim(s) 14 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over U.S. Patent Publication 2023/0249506 to Haslam et al (“Haslam”) in view of U.S. Patent 2007/0076595 to Lee et al (“Lee”) in further view of U.S. Patent Publication 2012/0189042 to Varadarajan et al (“Varadarajan”) and in further view of U.S. Patent Publication 2025/0253889 to Pan.
As to Claim 14, Haslam, Lee and Varadarajan depending on Claim 13, Haslam, Lee and Varadarajan do not expressly disclose wherein the first robust mode is selected based on the channel quality being greater than a second threshold. Pan teaches wherein the first robust mode is selected based on the channel quality being greater than a second threshold (the second communication apparatus measures average signal quality of subcarriers of each frequency band in the first communication frame, compares the average signal quality of the subcarriers of each frequency band with a first threshold, and determines at least one frequency band whose average signal quality is greater than the first threshold. The second communication apparatus may notify, by using the first indication information in the second communication frame, the first communication apparatus of the at least one frequency band whose power spectrum density is to be increased in the robust communication frame, see ¶ 0097).
Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify Haslam, Lee and Varadarajan with Pan to teach wherein the first robust mode is selected based on the channel quality being greater than a second threshold. The suggestion/motivation would have been in order to increase a probability of successful decoding and further improve communication reliability of PLC (see ¶ 0086).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to EBONI N GILES whose telephone number is (571)270-7453. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 9 am - 6 pm EST.
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, PATRICK EDOUARD can be reached at (571)272-7603. 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.
/EBONI N GILES/Examiner, Art Unit 2622
/PATRICK N EDOUARD/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2622
Prosecution Insights