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 .
Priority
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
Claim Objections
Claim 18 is objected to because of the following informalities:
In claim 18, line 1, “comprising the one or more processors to determine” should read “comprising the one or more processors to: determine”.
Appropriate correction is required.
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.
Claim(s) 1-2, 5-7 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US 20150105067 A1 (hereinafter Valliappan), in view of US 10856331 B1 (hereinafter Medapalli) and WO 2017123288 A1 (hereinafter Ouzieli).
Regarding claim 1, Valliappan teaches A device comprising a Wi-Fi transceiver and a second
wireless transceiver sharing at least one antenna, the device comprising one or more processors coupled with memory to (Valliappan Fig. 10, Fig. 12; [0078] FIG. 10 illustrates the configuration of an example Wi-Fi STA for assisting a Wi-Fi AP in managing co-channel LTE interference in a wireless communication network. In this example, an STA 1050 assisting a Wi-Fi AP 1010 is deployed in the vicinity of an LTE SC 1030 and an LTE UE 1040, which may or may not be directly visible to the Wi-Fi AP 1010. The Wi-Fi AP 1010 may serve the STA 1050 along with one or more other STAs (not shown).
[0079] In general, the STA 1050 includes various components for providing and processing services related to over-the-air connectivity. For example, the STA 1050 may include a transceiver 1012 for over-the-air WLAN communication with the Wi-Fi AP 1010, which may operate under the direction of a processor 1016 in conjunction with memory 1018, for example, all of which may be interconnected via a bus 1020 or the like.
[0080] the STA 1050 may also further include a signal energy monitor 1022 for monitoring signaling energy on a communication channel in the unlicensed frequency band. the STA 1050 may also include a waveform comparator 1024 for comparing the monitored signal energy with a known waveform signature corresponding to LTE. an interference identifier 1026 for identifying therefrom the presence of any LTE interferers, an interference classifier 1028 for classifying the type of interference being observed, and an interference moderator 1029 for performing interference avoidance and/or mitigation as appropriate.
[0084] FIG. 12 illustrates in more detail the principles of wireless communication between a wireless device 1210 (e.g., a base station) and a wireless device 1250 (e.g., a user device) of a sample communication system 1200 that may be adapted as described herein.
Note: As shown in Fig. 12, Antenna 1252 for the wireless device 1250.):
detect a burst of communications received by the second wireless transceiver for second wireless communications (Valliappan [0072] FIG. 8 is a signaling flow diagram illustrating an example of an STA-assisted method of managing co-channel LTE interference by a Wi-Fi AP in a wireless communication network. This example is similar to that described above with reference to FIG. 6 except that the Wi-Fi AP 510 is assisted by the STA 512, which may perform some of the operations. In this example, it is the STA 512 that monitors signaling energy on a communication channel in the unlicensed frequency band (block 810). Because of the proximity of the LTE SC 520 to the STA 512, as shown in FIG. 5, the monitored signal energy includes LTE signaling 802 from the LTE SC 520. Again, the STA 512 need not be provisioned with a dedicated LTE receiver, as it is able to nevertheless monitor signaling energy within its frequency band of operation using its own WLAN receiver circuitry.
[0073] Based on the monitored signal energy, the STA 512 may generate an interference report 804 and send it to the Wi-Fi AP 510 for further processing. The interference report 804 may take the form of raw measurement data simply collected and forwarded on by the STA 512, or may be further processed as desired. For example, the interference report 804 may include a noise histogram over successive (e.g., 10 ms) time periods with randomized measurement start times that enable the Wi-Fi AP 510 to determine if the histogram has a periodic pattern, or the interference report 804 may be a Radio Resource Measurement (RRM) report as defined in IEEE 802.11k.
[0074] The Wi-Fi AP 510 may then perform further processing including comparing the monitored signal energy from the interference report with a known waveform signature pattern corresponding to LTE (block 820), identifying therefrom the presence of any LTE interferers (block 830), classifying the type of interference being observed (block 840), and performing interference avoidance and/or mitigation as appropriate (block 850). Alternatively, some or all of these processing operations may be performed by the STA 512 itself (blocks 860-890), upon which a final (or other intermediate) interference report 806 may be generated and sent to the Wi-Fi AP 510 as shown.),
the device in communication with an access point (AP) to receive Wi-Fi communications (Valliappan [0053] FIG. 5 illustrates an example mixed communication network environment in which LTE small cells (LTE SCs) are deployed in proximity with Wi-Fi access points (Wi-Fi APs). For illustration purposes, an example Wi-Fi AP 510 is shown as serving various subscriber stations (STAs) 512 and 514, while a loaded LTE SC 520 is shown as serving a UE 522 in proximity to the Wi-Fi AP 510 and an unloaded LTE SC 530 also operates nearby. This communication environment creates several sources of potential co-channel interference for the Wi-Fi AP 510.
[0054] As shown, one source of co-channel interference is DL signaling by the unloaded LTE SC 530. This signaling generally includes broadcasted synchronization and discovery signaling such as the PSS signals, SSS signals, and CRS signals described above with reference to FIG. 2. This interference may impact any Wi-Fi device in range, including the Wi-Fi AP 510 as well as the STA 514. Another source of co-channel interference is DL signaling from the loaded LTE SC 520. This signaling generally includes not only the same broadcasted synchronization and discovery signaling, but also data transmissions to the UE 522. This interference may similarly impact any Wi-Fi device in range, including the STA 512.
Note: Wi-Fi AP 510 is the serving AP for STA 512.);
determine, responsive to the detection, a schedule for the AP to transmit Wi-Fi communications to the device (Valliappan [0081] FIG. 11 is a flow diagram illustrating an example method for interference management by a Wi-Fi device. As shown, the method may include monitoring, by a Wi-Fi device, signaling energy on a communication channel in a frequency band associated with the Wi-Fi device (block 1110), comparing the monitored signal energy with a known waveform signature corresponding to LTE operation (block 1120), and identifying a presence of an LTE interferer on the communication channel in the frequency band associated with the Wi-Fi device based on the comparison (block 1130). The method may also include classifying the LTE interferer as operating in accordance with one of the UL/DL configurations (block 1140) and performing interference avoidance or mitigation in response to identifying the presence of the LTE interferer (block 1150). The classification process may be based on a correlation of a periodicity of the monitored signaling energy with a plurality of predefined patterns associated with LTE UL/DL configurations, as discussed above with reference to FIG. 7.
[0082] As discussed in more detail above, the interference avoidance may include, for example ...(b) interference-aware, multi-user scheduling of Wi-Fi STAs based on the UL/DL configuration. The interference mitigation may include, for example ... (b) TXOP scheduling to align with UL/DL subframe boundaries.
[0083] The methodology of FIG. 11 may be performed by any Wi-Fi device including both Wi-Fi APs and STAs, acting alone or in combination (e.g., STA-assisted).),
Valliappan does not explicitly teach exceeding a time period allocated, the schedule comprising
a burst limit of a first time period on a periodic basis of a second time period; and communicate the schedule to the access point.
Medapalli in the same or similar field of endeavor teaches exceeding a time period allocated (Medapalli claim 10, detecting that a number of frames received from the first wireless device indicate the reservation duration that meets or exceeds the threshold duration value and that the number of frames meets or exceeds a threshold number of frames.),
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective
filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Valliappan with Medapalli’s above teachings. The motivation is improving network performance (Medapalli Col 1, Lines 23-29).
Valliappan in view of Medapalli does not explicitly teach the schedule comprising
a burst limit of a first time period on a periodic basis of a second time period; and communicate the schedule to the access point.
Ouzieli in the same or similar field of endeavor teaches the schedule comprising
a burst limit of a first time period on a periodic basis of a second time period (Ouzieli Fig. 11;
[0089] In one aspect, a WiFi-LTE time sharing message can also be transmitted 1125 by a transceiver circuitry of an UE 1110 and received by a transceiver circuitry of a WLAN AP 1130.
[0090] In one aspect, the WiFi-LTE time sharing messages sent from the UE to the WLAN AP can include an indication of activation of the WiFi-LTE time sharing mechanism, a time sharing period, an LTE active time-length of the time sharing period, an LTE inactive time-length of the time sharing period and a start of the time sharing period.
[0091] LTE data packets can be transmitted and received 1135 between the transceiver circuitry of the eNB 1115 and the transceiver circuitry of the UE 1110 during the LTE active time- lengths 1140 of the time sharing periods 1145. In addition, WiFi data packets can be transmitted and received 1150 between the transceiver circuitry of the WLAN-AP 1130 and the transceiver circuitry of the UE 1110 during the LTE inactive time-lengths 1155 of the time sharing periods 1145. The time sharing mechanism including the time sharing period, the LTE active time-length of the time sharing period, the LTE inactive time-length of the time sharing period, and the start of the time sharing period may be applied to both LTE and WiFi transmissions in both the uplink (UL) and down link (DL) communication channels. Accordingly, communications between the eNB and the UE are timed to the LTE active time-lengths so that the LTE transmissions between the eNB to the UE do not interfere with WiFi communications between the WLAN-AP and the UE. Similarly, communications between the WLAN AP and the UE are timed to the LTE inactive time-lengths so that the WiFi transmission between the WLAN AP and the UE do not interfere with communications between the eNB and the UE.); and
communicate the schedule to the access point (Ouzieli [0089] In one aspect, a WiFi-LTE time sharing message can also be transmitted 1125 by a transceiver circuitry of an UE 1110 and received by a transceiver circuitry of a WLAN AP 1130.).
By modifying Valliappan’s teachings of detect a burst of communications received by the second wireless transceiver for second wireless communications, the device in communication with an access point (AP) to receive Wi-Fi communications; with Medapalli’s teachings of exceeding a time period allocated, the modification results in
detect a burst of communications received by the second wireless transceiver exceeding a time
period allocated for second wireless communications, the device in communication with an access point (AP) to receive Wi-Fi communications;
By modifying Valliappan’s teachings of determine, responsive to the detection, a schedule for the AP to transmit Wi-Fi communications to the device with Ouzieli’s teachings of the schedule comprising a burst limit of a first time period on a periodic basis of a second time period; and communicate the schedule to the access point, the modification results in
determine, responsive to the detection, a schedule for the AP to transmit Wi-Fi communications to the device, the schedule comprising a burst limit of a first time period on a periodic basis of a second time period; and communicate the schedule to the access point.
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective
filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Valliappan as modified by Medapalli with Ouzieli’s above teachings. The motivation is providing solution for in-device coexistence issues (Ouzieli [0002]).
Regarding claim 2, Valliappan in view of Medapalli and Ouzieli (hereinafter combination)
teaches The device of claim 1.
Valliappan does not explicitly teach wherein the first time period is allocated for receiving the
Wi-Fi transmissions and the second time period corresponds to a time duration between a start of the first time period and a start of a next first time period on the periodic basis of the second time period, the next first time period allocated for receiving the Wi-Fi transmissions.
Ouzieli teaches wherein the first time period is allocated for receiving the Wi-Fi transmissions and the second time period corresponds to a time duration between a start of the first time period and a start of a next first time period on the periodic basis of the second time period, the next first time period allocated for receiving the Wi-Fi transmissions (Ouzieli Fig. 11; [0091] WiFi data packets can be transmitted and received 1150 between the transceiver circuitry of the WLAN-AP 1130 and the transceiver circuitry of the UE 1110 during the LTE inactive time-lengths 1155 of the time sharing periods 1145. The time sharing mechanism including the time sharing period, the LTE active time-length of the time sharing period, the LTE inactive time-length of the time sharing period, and the start of the time sharing period may be applied to both LTE and WiFi transmissions in both the uplink (UL) and down link (DL) communication channels. Accordingly, communications between the eNB and the UE are timed to the LTE active time-lengths so that the LTE transmissions between the eNB to the UE do not interfere with WiFi communications between the WLAN-AP and the UE. Similarly, communications between the WLAN AP and the UE are timed to the LTE inactive time-lengths so that the WiFi transmission between the WLAN AP and the UE do not interfere with communications between the eNB and the UE.).
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective
filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the combination with Ouzieli’s above teachings. The motivation is providing solution for in-device coexistence issues (Ouzieli [0002]).
Regarding claim 5, the combination teaches The device of claim 1, comprising the one or more
processors to:
Valliappan teaches detect that a second burst of communications received by the second wireless transceiver overlaps with a portion of the first time period allocated to receive Wi-Fi communications from the AP according to the schedule (Valliappan [0072] FIG. 8 is a signaling flow diagram illustrating an example of an STA-assisted method of managing co-channel LTE interference by a Wi-Fi AP in a wireless communication network. This example is similar to that described above with reference to FIG. 6 except that the Wi-Fi AP 510 is assisted by the STA 512, which may perform some of the operations. In this example, it is the STA 512 that monitors signaling energy on a communication channel in the unlicensed frequency band (block 810). Because of the proximity of the LTE SC 520 to the STA 512, as shown in FIG. 5, the monitored signal energy includes LTE signaling 802 from the LTE SC 520. Again, the STA 512 need not be provisioned with a dedicated LTE receiver, as it is able to nevertheless monitor signaling energy within its frequency band of operation using its own WLAN receiver circuitry.
[0081] FIG. 11 is a flow diagram illustrating an example method for interference management by a Wi-Fi device. As shown, the method may include monitoring, by a Wi-Fi device, signaling energy on a communication channel in a frequency band associated with the Wi-Fi device (block 1110), comparing the monitored signal energy with a known waveform signature corresponding to LTE operation (block 1120), and identifying a presence of an LTE interferer on the communication channel in the frequency band associated with the Wi-Fi device based on the comparison (block 1130). The method may also include classifying the LTE interferer as operating in accordance with one of the UL/DL configurations (block 1140) and performing interference avoidance or mitigation in response to identifying the presence of the LTE interferer (block 1150). The classification process may be based on a correlation of a periodicity of the monitored signaling energy with a plurality of predefined patterns associated with LTE UL/DL configurations, as discussed above with reference to FIG. 7.
); and adjust, responsive to the overlap, the schedule ( Valliappan
[0082] As discussed in more detail above, the interference avoidance may include, for example ...(b) interference-aware, multi-user scheduling of Wi-Fi STAs based on the UL/DL configuration. The interference mitigation may include, for example ... (b) TXOP scheduling to align with UL/DL subframe boundaries.
[0083] The methodology of FIG. 11 may be performed by any Wi-Fi device including both Wi-Fi APs and STAs, acting alone or in combination (e.g., STA-assisted).).
Regarding claim 6, the combination teaches The device of claim 5.
Valliappan teaches wherein the schedule is adjusted to change at least one of a duration of the
first time period or a duration of the second time period according to a duration of the second burst of communications (Valliappan [0082] As discussed in more detail above, the interference avoidance may include, for example ...(b) interference-aware, multi-user scheduling of Wi-Fi STAs based on the UL/DL configuration. The interference mitigation may include, for example ... (b) TXOP scheduling to align with UL/DL subframe boundaries.
Note: To align TXOP scheduling with UL/DL subframe boundaries is to change at least one of a duration of the first time period according to a duration of the second burst of communications.).
Regarding claim 7, the combination teaches The device of claim 1.
Valliappan teaches wherein the second wireless communications correspond to at least one of:
Bluetooth communications,
Ultra-Wideband (UWB) communications,
Long-Term Evolution (LTE) communications (Valliappan [0072] FIG. 8 is a signaling flow diagram
illustrating an example of an STA-assisted method of managing co-channel LTE interference by a Wi-Fi AP in a wireless communication network. This example is similar to that described above with reference to FIG. 6 except that the Wi-Fi AP 510 is assisted by the STA 512, which may perform some of the operations. In this example, it is the STA 512 that monitors signaling energy on a communication channel in the unlicensed frequency band (block 810). Because of the proximity of the LTE SC 520 to the STA 512, as shown in FIG. 5, the monitored signal energy includes LTE signaling 802 from the LTE SC 520. Again, the STA 512 need not be provisioned with a dedicated LTE receiver, as it is able to nevertheless monitor signaling energy within its frequency band of operation using its own WLAN receiver circuitry.),
Licensed Assisted Access (LAA) communications,
New Radio (NR) communications or
New Radio-Unlicensed (NR-U) communications.
Claim(s) 3-4 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Valliappan in view of Medapalli and Ouzieli as applied to claim 2 above, and further in view of US 20150305031 A1 (hereinafter Prajapati).
Regarding claim 3, the combination teaches The device of claim 2, comprising the one or more
processors to:
The combination does not explicitly teach receive, during the next first time period, an aggregated medium access control protocol data unit (AMPDU) of the Wi-Fi communication, the AMPDU comprising a size adjusted according to the next first time period.
Prajapati in the same or similar field of endeavor teaches receive, during the next first time period, an aggregated medium access control protocol data unit (AMPDU) of the Wi-Fi communication, the AMPDU comprising a size adjusted according to the next first time period (Prajapati [0052] Referring next to FIG. 8, shown is an example of a networked environment 800 including a communication device 100 with coexisting Wi-Fi and cellular communications.
[0053] When Wi-Fi transmissions from AP 803 occur during LTE or other cellular transmissions by the communication device 100, the STA 118 may not be able to acknowledge (ACK) the received frames or packets because of mutual interference between the coexisting WLAN and LTE signals. To avoid the effects of mutual interference (e.g., retry, rate drop, and/or packet loss), the communication interface 103 can coordinate WLAN communications so that frames or packets are received by the STAs 403 during an LTE-Free subframe. RDP and/or CTS2self messaging may again be used for time domain coordination of the coexisting RF signals.
[0054] Referring to FIG. 9, shown is an example of the coordination of coexistent Wi-Fi and cellular communications using a RDG when the communication device 100 is acting as a STA 118 of the WLAN 806 (FIG. 8).
[0056] The STA 118 sends a RDG frame 912 to AP 803 after obtaining contention free access to grant the use of the WLAN channel to the AP 803 for a duration equal to the TXOP 915 of the LTE-Free subframe period 903. The RDG frame 912 may include a RDG flag that is set to 1 to indicate a reverse direction grant is provided to the AP 803 and/or a duration field in a MAC header specifying the duration during which the AP 803 may transmit. The duration is set such that the AP transmission ends before the next LTE-TX/RX subframe period 906 starts. With the grant of RDG frame 912, the AP 803 may then transmit one or more frames 918 for at least a portion of the duration.
[0065] Based upon the number of MPDUs that are buffered for transmission and the modulation and coding scheme (MCS) rate, the number of MPDUs that may be transmitted within the specified duration can be determined. If multiple MPDUs may be transmitted, an AMPDU (including delimiter) may be formed for transmission.).
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective
filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the combination with Prajapati’s above teachings. The motivation is reducing mutual interference between LTE and WLAN (Prajapati [0027]).
Regarding claim 4, the combination teaches The device of claim 2, comprising the one or more
processors to:
The combination does not explicitly teach receive, during the next first time period, an aggregated medium access control protocol data unit (AMPDU) of the Wi-Fi communication, the AMPDU sized with respect to a time length of the next first time period and allow for a completion of transmission of a block acknowledgement (BA) of the AMPDU within the next first time period.
Prajapati in the same or similar field of endeavor teaches receive, during the next first time
period, an aggregated medium access control protocol data unit (AMPDU) of the Wi-Fi communication, the AMPDU sized with respect to a time length of the next first time period and allow for a completion of transmission of a block acknowledgement (BA) of the AMPDU within the next first time period (Prajapati [0052] Referring next to FIG. 8, shown is an example of a networked environment 800 including a communication device 100 with coexisting Wi-Fi and cellular communications.
[0053] When Wi-Fi transmissions from AP 803 occur during LTE or other cellular transmissions by the communication device 100, the STA 118 may not be able to acknowledge (ACK) the received frames or packets because of mutual interference between the coexisting WLAN and LTE signals. To avoid the effects of mutual interference (e.g., retry, rate drop, and/or packet loss), the communication interface 103 can coordinate WLAN communications so that frames or packets are received by the STAs 403 during an LTE-Free subframe. RDP and/or CTS2self messaging may again be used for time domain coordination of the coexisting RF signals.
[0054] Referring to FIG. 9, shown is an example of the coordination of coexistent Wi-Fi and cellular communications using a RDG when the communication device 100 is acting as a STA 118 of the WLAN 806 (FIG. 8).
[0056] The STA 118 sends a RDG frame 912 to AP 803 after obtaining contention free access to grant the use of the WLAN channel to the AP 803 for a duration equal to the TXOP 915 of the LTE-Free subframe period 903. The RDG frame 912 may include a RDG flag that is set to 1 to indicate a reverse direction grant is provided to the AP 803 and/or a duration field in a MAC header specifying the duration during which the AP 803 may transmit. The duration is set such that the AP transmission ends before the next LTE-TX/RX subframe period 906 starts. With the grant of RDG frame 912, the AP 803 may then transmit one or more frames 918 for at least a portion of the duration. When the frames 918 have been received from the AP 803, the STA 118 sends an acknowledgement (ACK) 921 (or BlockACK) confirming receipt.
[0065] Based upon the number of MPDUs that are buffered for transmission and the modulation and coding scheme (MCS) rate, the number of MPDUs that may be transmitted within the specified duration can be determined. If multiple MPDUs may be transmitted, an AMPDU (including delimiter) may be formed for transmission.).
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective
filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the combination with Prajapati’s above teachings. The motivation is reducing mutual interference between LTE and WLAN (Prajapati [0027]).
Claim(s) 8 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Valliappan in view of Medapalli and Ouzieli as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of “Proposals on AMPDU-BA mechanisms”, Broadcom, IEEE 802.11-20/0362r4 (12/17/2020) (hereinafter Verma).
Regarding claim 8, the combination teaches The device of claim 1, comprising the one or more
processors to:
Although Ouzieli teaches communicate the schedule to the access point (Ouzieli [0089] In one aspect, a WiFi-LTE time sharing message can also be transmitted 1125 by a transceiver circuitry of an UE 1110 and received by a transceiver circuitry of a WLAN AP 1130.),
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective
filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the combination with Ouzieli’s above teachings. The motivation is providing solution for in-device coexistence issues (Ouzieli [0002]).
Ouzieli does not explicitly teach receive, from the access point, an aggregated medium access control protocol data unit (AMPDU) of the Wi-Fi communication; generate a block acknowledgement (BA) for the AMPDU; via the BA.
Verma in the same or similar field of endeavor teaches receive, from the access point, an aggregated medium access control protocol data unit (AMPDU) of the Wi-Fi communication (Verma slide 5, AMPDU Recipient limitations
An AMPDU recipient is required to respond with BA at SIFS after the eliciting AMPDU’s PPDU
A recipient might sometimes be incapable of transmitting the BA at SIFS due to:
RX-TX switching delay
In device coexistence constraints: The recipient may have an upcoming burst of activity on another in-device technology like Bluetooth/LTE/NR which would prevent it from transmitting BA due to in-device leakage
A recipient might sometimes be incapable of receiving later MPDUs within an AMPDU due to:
Internal processing limitations (e.g. processing delay beyond SIFS, based on MCS/byte count/MPDU count, etc)
In-device coexistence constraints where an upcoming burst of activity on another technology would prevent reception due to in-device leakage.);
via the BA (Verma slide 10, slide 10, Solutions for AMPDU Recipient limitations (1)
AMPDU Recipient indicates its limitations to AMPDU originator
Maximum MPDU count, maximum byte count to transmit BA at SIFS
Minimum delay, maximum delay for BA transmission
In device coexistence issues if they exist.
AMPDU Originator allows for delayed BA response
If the AMPDU originator follows the recipient’s limitations e.g. transmits AMPDUs which fall below the indicated limits, and recipient has not signaled that coexistence issues are present
AMPDU Originator interprets lack of BA at SIFS as failure
Otherwise, AMPDU originator interprets lack of BA as delayed BA.).
By modifying Ouzieli’s teachings of communicate the schedule to the access point with Verma’s
teachings of receive, from the access point, an aggregated medium access control protocol data unit (AMPDU) of the Wi-Fi communication; generate a block acknowledgement (BA) for the AMPDU; via the BA, the modification results in
receive, from the access point, an aggregated medium access control protocol data unit
(AMPDU) of the Wi-Fi communication; generate a block acknowledgement (BA) for the AMPDU; communicate the schedule to the access point, via the BA.
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective
filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the combination as modified by Ouzieli with Verma’s above teachings. The motivation is improving efficiency especially related to multi-link operation, latency reduction, in-device-coexistence (Verma slide 2).
Claim(s) 9-10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Valliappan in view of Medapalli and Ouzieli as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of US 20180035426 A1 (hereinafter Barriac).
Regarding claim 9, the combination teaches The device of claim 1.
Although Ouzieli teaches wherein the schedule is for receiving the Wi-Fi communications
(Ouzieli [0091] WiFi data packets can be transmitted and received 1150 between the transceiver circuitry of the WLAN-AP 1130 and the transceiver circuitry of the UE 1110 during the LTE inactive time-lengths 1155 of the time sharing periods 1145.),
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective
filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the combination with Ouzieli’s above teachings. The motivation is providing solution for in-device coexistence issues (Ouzieli [0002]).
Ouzieli does not explicitly teach via a first communication channel of a plurality of communication channels.
Barriac in the same or similar field of endeavor teaches via a first communication channel of a
plurality of communication channels (Barriac [0032] The AP 104 may transmit on one or more channels (e.g., multiple narrowband channels, each channel including a frequency bandwidth) … via a communication link such as the downlink 108, to other nodes (STAs) of the wireless communication system 100.).
By modifying Ouzieli’s teachings of wherein the schedule is for receiving the Wi-Fi communications with Barriac’s teachings of via a first communication channel of a plurality of communication channels, the modification results in
wherein the schedule is for receiving the Wi-Fi communications via a first communication
channel of a plurality of communication channels.
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective
filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the combination as modified by Ouzieli with Barriac’s above teachings. The motivation is improving data transmission (Barriac [0036]).
Regarding claim 10, Valliappan in view of Medapalli and Ouzieli and Barriac teaches The device
of claim 9, comprising the one or more processors to:
Valliappan teaches detect a second burst of communications received by the second transceiver for second wireless communications (Valliappan [0072] FIG. 8 is a signaling flow diagram illustrating an example of an STA-assisted method of managing co-channel LTE interference by a Wi-Fi AP in a wireless communication network. This example is similar to that described above with reference to FIG. 6 except that the Wi-Fi AP 510 is assisted by the STA 512, which may perform some of the operations. In this example, it is the STA 512 that monitors signaling energy on a communication channel in the unlicensed frequency band (block 810). Because of the proximity of the LTE SC 520 to the STA 512, as shown in FIG. 5, the monitored signal energy includes LTE signaling 802 from the LTE SC 520. Again, the STA 512 need not be provisioned with a dedicated LTE receiver, as it is able to nevertheless monitor signaling energy within its frequency band of operation using its own WLAN receiver circuitry.
[0073] Based on the monitored signal energy, the STA 512 may generate an interference report 804 and send it to the Wi-Fi AP 510 for further processing. The interference report 804 may take the form of raw measurement data simply collected and forwarded on by the STA 512, or may be further processed as desired. For example, the interference report 804 may include a noise histogram over successive (e.g., 10 ms) time periods with randomized measurement start times that enable the Wi-Fi AP 510 to determine if the histogram has a periodic pattern, or the interference report 804 may be a Radio Resource Measurement (RRM) report as defined in IEEE 802.11k.
[0074] The Wi-Fi AP 510 may then perform further processing including comparing the monitored signal energy from the interference report with a known waveform signature pattern corresponding to LTE (block 820), identifying therefrom the presence of any LTE interferers (block 830), classifying the type of interference being observed (block 840), and performing interference avoidance and/or mitigation as appropriate (block 850). Alternatively, some or all of these processing operations may be performed by the STA 512 itself (blocks 860-890), upon which a final (or other intermediate) interference report 806 may be generated and sent to the Wi-Fi AP 510 as shown.);
determine, responsive to the detection of the second burst of communications, a second schedule for the access point to transmit Wi-Fi communications to the device (Valliappan [0081] FIG. 11 is a flow diagram illustrating an example method for interference management by a Wi-Fi device. As shown, the method may include monitoring, by a Wi-Fi device, signaling energy on a communication channel in a frequency band associated with the Wi-Fi device (block 1110), comparing the monitored signal energy with a known waveform signature corresponding to LTE operation (block 1120), and identifying a presence of an LTE interferer on the communication channel in the frequency band associated with the Wi-Fi device based on the comparison (block 1130). The method may also include classifying the LTE interferer as operating in accordance with one of the UL/DL configurations (block 1140) and performing interference avoidance or mitigation in response to identifying the presence of the LTE interferer (block 1150). The classification process may be based on a correlation of a periodicity of the monitored signaling energy with a plurality of predefined patterns associated with LTE UL/DL configurations, as discussed above with reference to FIG. 7.
[0082] As discussed in more detail above, the interference avoidance may include, for example ... (b) interference-aware, multi-user scheduling of Wi-Fi STAs based on the UL/DL configuration. The interference mitigation may include, for example ... (b) TXOP scheduling to align with UL/DL subframe boundaries.
[0083] The methodology of FIG. 11 may be performed by any Wi-Fi device including both Wi-Fi APs and STAs, acting alone or in combination (e.g., STA-assisted).),
Valliappan does not explicitly teach exceeding a second time period allocated, via a second
channel of the plurality of channels, the second schedule comprising a second burst limit of a third time period on a second periodic basis of a fourth time period; and communicate the second schedule to the access point.
Medapalli teaches exceeding a second time period allocated (Medapalli claim 10, detecting that a number of frames received from the first wireless device indicate the reservation duration that meets or exceeds the threshold duration value and that the number of frames meets or exceeds a threshold number of frames.),
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective
filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Valliappan as modified by Medapalli and Ouzieli and Barriac with Medapalli’s above teachings. The motivation is improving network performance (Medapalli Col 1, Lines 23-29).
Valliappan in view of Medapalli does not explicitly teach via a second channel of the plurality of channels.
Barriac teaches via a second channel of the plurality of channels (Barriac [0032] The AP 104 may
transmit on one or more channels (e.g., multiple narrowband channels, each channel including a frequency bandwidth) … via a communication link such as the downlink 108, to other nodes (STAs) of the wireless communication system 100.).
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective
filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Valliappan as modified by Medapalli and Ouzieli and Barriac with Barriac’s above teachings. The motivation is improving data transmission (Barriac [0036]).
Valliappan in view of Medapalli and Barriac does not explicitly teach the second schedule comprising a second burst limit of a third time period on a second periodic basis of a fourth time period; and communicate the second schedule to the access point.
Ouzieli teaches the second schedule comprising a second burst limit of a third time period on a second periodic basis of a fourth time period (Ouzieli Fig. 11;
[0089] In one aspect, a WiFi-LTE time sharing message can also be transmitted 1125 by a transceiver circuitry of an UE 1110 and received by a transceiver circuitry of a WLAN AP 1130.
[0090] In one aspect, the WiFi-LTE time sharing messages sent from the UE to the WLAN AP can include an indication of activation of the WiFi-LTE time sharing mechanism, a time sharing period, an LTE active time-length of the time sharing period, an LTE inactive time-length of the time sharing period and a start of the time sharing period.
[0091] LTE data packets can be transmitted and received 1135 between the transceiver circuitry of the eNB 1115 and the transceiver circuitry of the UE 1110 during the LTE active time- lengths 1140 of the time sharing periods 1145. In addition, WiFi data packets can be transmitted and received 1150 between the transceiver circuitry of the WLAN-AP 1130 and the transceiver circuitry of the UE 1110 during the LTE inactive time-lengths 1155 of the time sharing periods 1145. The time sharing mechanism including the time sharing period, the LTE active time-length of the time sharing period, the LTE inactive time-length of the time sharing period, and the start of the time sharing period may be applied to both LTE and WiFi transmissions in both the uplink (UL) and down link (DL) communication channels. Accordingly, communications between the eNB and the UE are timed to the LTE active time-lengths so that the LTE transmissions between the eNB to the UE do not interfere with WiFi communications between the WLAN-AP and the UE. Similarly, communications between the WLAN AP and the UE are timed to the LTE inactive time-lengths so that the WiFi transmission between the WLAN AP and the UE do not interfere with communications between the eNB and the UE.); and
communicate the second schedule to the access point (Ouzieli [0089] In one aspect, a WiFi-LTE time sharing message can also be transmitted 1125 by a transceiver circuitry of an UE 1110 and received by a transceiver circuitry of a WLAN AP 1130.).
By modifying Valliappan’s teachings of detect a second burst of communications received by the second transceiver for second wireless communications; determine, responsive to the detection of the second burst of communications, a second schedule for the access point to transmit Wi-Fi communications to the device with Medapalli’s teachings of exceeding a second time period allocated, and Barriac’s teachings of via a second channel of the plurality of channels, and Ouzieli’s teachings of the second schedule comprising a second burst limit of a third time period on a second periodic basis of a fourth time period; and communicate the second schedule to the access point, the modification results in
detect a second burst of communications received by the second transceiver exceeding a second time period allocated for second wireless communications;
determine, responsive to the detection of the second burst of communications, a second schedule for the access point to transmit Wi-Fi communications to the device via a second channel of the plurality of channels,
the second schedule comprising a second burst limit of a third time period on a second periodic basis of a fourth time period; and communicate the second schedule to the access point.
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective
filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Valliappan as modified by Medapalli and Ouzieli and Barriac with Ouzieli’s above teachings. The motivation is providing solution for in-device coexistence issues (Ouzieli [0002]).
Claim(s) 11-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Verma in view of Barriac.
Regarding claim 11, Verma teaches An access point (Verma slide 10, AMPDU Recipient, i.e.
device; AMPDU originator, i.e. Access point.),
receive, from a device, a block acknowledgement (BA) comprising information identifying
existence of an in device-coexistence issue on the device (Verma slide 10, AMPDU Recipient indicates its limitations to AMPDU originator
Maximum MPDU count, maximum byte count to transmit BA at SIFS
Minimum delay, maximum delay for BA transmission
In device coexistence issues if they exist.);
determine, responsive to identifying the in device-coexistence issue, to allow one or more BAs from the device responsive to one or more aggregated medium access control protocol data units (AMPDUs) from the AP to be delayed past a short interframe space (SIFS) without being identified as a failure (Verma slide 10, AMPDU Originator allows for delayed BA response
If the AMPDU originator follows the recipient’s limitations e.g. transmits AMPDUs which fall below the indicated limits, and recipient has not signaled that coexistence issues are present
AMPDU Originator interprets lack of BA at SIFS as failure
Otherwise, AMPDU originator interprets lack of BA as delayed BA.); and
receive, after the SIFS and responsive to the determination, a second BA from the device, the second BA comprising a plurality of acknowledgements corresponding to a plurality of AMPDUs received from the AP (Verma slide 11, If the AMPDU Originator interprets lack of BA as delayed BA
It assumes that the missing BA will be transmitted by the recipient after a negotiated minimum delay X and before a maximum delay Y, either using contention OR Triggered by a BAR
The expiry of maximum delay will lead to the assumption at the originator that the AMPDU is in error
It optionally continues with TXOP (i.e. after PIFS) transmitting the next PPDU to same recipient or other recipient(s)
AMPDU Recipient exercising delayed BA
If the recipient transmits BA within SIFS, the BA indicates the last processed sequence number of the AMPDU (<=last sequence number in the AMPDU) .
Else when transmitted, the BA should be cumulative in terms of ACK information e.g. if additional AMPDUs arrive before BA is transmitted).
Verma does not explicitly teach comprising: one or more processors coupled with memory to:
Barriac in the same or similar field of endeavor teaches comprising: one or more processors
coupled with memory to (Barriac Fig. 1, [0027] FIG. 1 shows an example wireless communication system 100 in which aspects of the present disclosure may be employed. The wireless communication system 100 may operate pursuant to a wireless standard, for example current or future 802.11 standards. The wireless communication system 100 may include an AP 104, which communicates with STAs (e.g., STAs 112, 114, 116, and 118).
[0067] FIG. 6 is a functional block diagram of a wireless device 602 that may be employed within the wireless communication system 100 of FIG. 1. the wireless device 602 may be the AP 104.
[0068] The wireless device 602 may include a processor 604 which controls operation of the wireless device 602. Memory 606, which may include both read-only memory (ROM) and random access memory (RAM), may provide instructions and data to the processor 604.):
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective
filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Verma with Barriac’s above teachings. The motivation is improving data transmission (Barriac [0036]).
Regarding claim 19, Verma teaches A device communicating wirelessly with an access point
(AP) (Verma slide 10, AMPDU Recipient, i.e. device; AMPDU originator, i.e. Access point.),
identify a physical protocol data unit (PPDU) created and waiting to be transmitted to an access point (AP) during a current transaction opportunity (TXOP) (Verma slide 14,
PNG
media_image1.png
200
400
media_image1.png
Greyscale
as shown in the Fig above, a PPDU is created, contents fixed, Length field assigned. PPDU transmitted in the current TXOP.);
identify a low latency packet received by the device during the current TXOP, the low latency packet to be communicated to the AP within a next PPDU following the PPDU (Verma slide 14,
PNG
media_image1.png
200
400
media_image1.png
Greyscale
as shown in the Fig above, a Low latency packet arrives during the current TXOP, the low
latency packet can only be transmitted in the next PPDU which can even be in the next TXOP.);
insert the low latency packet into the PPDU; and transmit the PPDU comprising the low latency packet to the AP within the current TXOP (Verma slide 14,
Handling latency-sensitive traffic
Allowing multiple PPDUs with SIFS gap or no gap in between can also help better prioritize latency sensitive traffic and hence reduce latency
For example, this can enable the insertion of latency sensitive traffic in an ongoing transmission, rather than wait for the end of the ongoing transmission burst/TXOP
When low-latency packets are anticipated, long PPDUs in a TXOP can be broken into a sequence of shorter PPDUs to allow insertion of low latency traffic.
PNG
media_image2.png
200
400
media_image2.png
Greyscale
As shown in the Fig above, The low latency packet is inserted and transmitted within the current TXOP.).
Verma does not explicitly teach the device comprising: one or more processors coupled with memory to:
Barriac in the same or similar field of endeavor teaches the device comprising: one or more processors coupled with memory to (Barriac Fig. 1, [0027] FIG. 1 shows an example wireless communication system 100 in which aspects of the present disclosure may be employed. The wireless communication system 100 may operate pursuant to a wireless standard, for example current or future 802.11 standards. The wireless communication system 100 may include an AP 104, which communicates with STAs (e.g., STAs 112, 114, 116, and 118).
[0067] FIG. 6 is a functional block diagram of a wireless device 602 that may be employed within the wireless communication system 100 of FIG. 1. the wireless device 602 may be the STAs 112.
[0068] The wireless device 602 may include a processor 604 which controls operation of the wireless device 602. Memory 606, which may include both read-only memory (ROM) and random access memory (RAM), may provide instructions and data to the processor 604.):
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective
filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Verma with Barriac’s above teachings. The motivation is improving data transmission (Barriac [0036]).
Regarding claim 12, Verma in view of Barriac teaches The access point of claim 11, comprising
the one or more processors to:
Verma teaches determine, responsive to the determination, that a plurality of transmissions for the plurality of AMPDUs are successful regardless of the second BA received after the SIFS (Verma slide 10, AMPDU Originator allows for delayed BA response
If the AMPDU originator follows the recipient’s limitations e.g. transmits AMPDUs which fall below the indicated limits, and recipient has not signaled that coexistence issues are present
AMPDU Originator interprets lack of BA at SIFS as failure
Otherwise, AMPDU originator interprets lack of BA as delayed BA.
slide 11, AMPDU Recipient exercising delayed BA
If the recipient transmits BA within SIFS, the BA indicates the last processed sequence number of the AMPDU (<=last sequence number in the AMPDU) .
Else when transmitted, the BA should be cumulative in terms of ACK information e.g. if additional AMPDUs arrive before BA is transmitted).
Regarding claim 13, Verma in view of Barriac teaches The access point of claim 11, comprising
the one or more processors to:
Verma teaches receive, from a second device, a block acknowledgement (BA) comprising information not identifying an in device-coexistence issue on the second device (Verma slide 10, AMPDU Recipient indicates its limitations to AMPDU originator
Maximum MPDU count, maximum byte count to transmit BA at SIFS
Minimum delay, maximum delay for BA transmission
In device coexistence issues if they exist.);
transmit, to a second device, an AMPDU; determine that a BA for the AMPDU is not received within the SIFS; and identify that the transmission of the AMPDU has failed responsive to the BA not being received within the SIFS (Verma slide 10, If the AMPDU originator follows the recipient’s limitations e.g. transmits AMPDUs which fall below the indicated limits, and recipient has not signaled that coexistence issues are present
AMPDU Originator interprets lack of BA at SIFS as failure).
Regarding claim 14, Verma in view of Barriac teaches The access point of claim 11, comprising
the one or more processors to:
Verma teaches identify that the device is configured for Wi-Fi communication in which transmission of one or more BAs for the one or more AMPDUs is delayed until after one or more SIFSs following the one or more AMPDUs (Verma slide 13, The Originator may not desire BA after SIFS because:
It intends to send sequence of AMPDUs (with no gaps or SIFS gap)
E.g. for handling latency sensitive traffic, MCS exploration for link adaptation, improving decoding/CCA (details later)
There are known recipient limitations vs AMPDU contents
E.g. AMPDU exceeds maximum byte count indicated by the recipient); and
transmit, responsive to the configuration, a provision to communicate the plurality of AMPDUs according to the configuration (Verma slide 13, The originator indicates a provision/desire for delayed BA (to a recipient that indicates capability)
After signaling, the originator is free to transmit again after SIFS or even without any gap
The originator will elicit a BA later e.g. using Implicit BAR / explicit BAR).
Regarding claim 15, Verma in view of Barriac teaches The access point of claim 14.
Verma teaches wherein the provision is indicated in at least one of a header of a physical layer
or a header of a medium access control header of an AMPDU of the plurality of AMPDUs (Verma slide 13, The originator indicates a provision/desire for delayed BA (to a recipient that indicates capability)
E.g. indication in PHY header or MAC header OR Ack Policy = Block Ack (within the HT-immediate context)).
Regarding claim 16, Verma in view of Barriac teaches The access point of claim 11, comprising
the one or more processors to:
Verma does not explicitly teach identify, from the information a channel quality information indicating a signal-to-interference-plus-noise ratio (SINR) margin; and adjust, responsive to the SINR margin, a modulation and coding scheme (MCS) for transmissions to the device.
Barriac teaches identify, from the information a channel quality information indicating a signal-to-interference-plus-noise ratio (SINR) margin (Barriac Fig. 3, [0040] FIG. 3 is a call flow diagram 300 illustrating a method of determining a frame size based on channel feedback in acknowledgement (ACK) or block ACK (BACK) frames. Referring to FIG. 3, a first wireless device 305 may communicate over a connection with a second wireless device 310. In one aspect, the first wireless device 305 may be a STA, and the second wireless device 310 may be an AP, or vice versa.
[0042] Based on the number of successfully received frames and/or the measured SINR/SNR of each of the frames, the second wireless device may determine 320 channel feedback on the channel(s) on which the one or more frames 315 was transmitted. In one aspect, the channel feedback may include the measured SINR associated with each one of the one or more frames 315 (or subframes) received by the second wireless device 310. the channel feedback may include one or more recommended MCSs.the recommended MCS may be based on the one or more frames 315 and on a history of measured SINRs of frames received from the first wireless device 305.); and
adjust, responsive to the SINR margin, a modulation and coding scheme (MCS) for transmissions to the device (Barriac [0043] After determining the channel feedback, the second wireless device 310 may transmit the channel feedback in an ACK frame 325 (or block ACK (BACK) frame) associated with the received one or more frames. The first wireless device 305 may receive the ACK/BACK frame and determine 330 a frame size (or PPDU size) for transmitting a frame 335 to the second wireless device 310. By receiving the channel feedback with ACKs or BACKs, the first wireless device 305 may be able to determine a current channel quality, when and how often channel quality changes, and durations for which the channel quality remains constant at various levels. In an aspect, the first wireless device 305 may determine, based on the channel feedback included in the ACKs or BACKs, an expected duration for which a channel quality is greater than a threshold (e.g., duration for which a channel may support a particular MCS at the receiver).).
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective
filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Verma as modified by Barriac with Barriac’s above teachings. The motivation is improving data transmission (Barriac [0036]).
Regarding claim 17, Verma in view of Barriac teaches The access point of claim 11, comprising
the one or more processors to:
Verma does not explicitly teach identify, from the information an indication corresponding to at least one of: a modulation and coding scheme (MCS) for transmissions to the device, a signal strength of the one or more AMPDUs or presence of one or more hidden nodes; and adjust, responsive to the indication, for a next AMPDU to be transmitted to the device, at least one of: the MCS, the signal strength, or transmission power corresponding to the one or more hidden nodes.
Barriac teaches identify, from the information an indication corresponding to at least one of: a modulation and coding scheme (MCS) for transmissions to the device, a signal strength of the one or more AMPDUs or presence of one or more hidden nodes (Barriac Fig. 3, [0040] FIG. 3 is a call flow diagram 300 illustrating a method of determining a frame size based on channel feedback in acknowledgement (ACK) or block ACK (BACK) frames. Referring to FIG. 3, a first wireless device 305 may communicate over a connection with a second wireless device 310. In one aspect, the first wireless device 305 may be a STA, and the second wireless device 310 may be an AP, or vice versa.
[0042] Based on the number of successfully received frames and/or the measured SINR/SNR of each of the frames, the second wireless device may determine 320 channel feedback on the channel(s) on which the one or more frames 315 was transmitted. In one aspect, the channel feedback may include the measured SINR associated with each one of the one or more frames 315 (or subframes) received by the second wireless device 310. the channel feedback may include one or more recommended MCSs. the recommended MCS may be based on the one or more frames 315 and on a history of measured SINRs of frames received from the first wireless device 305.); and
adjust, responsive to the indication, for a next AMPDU to be transmitted to the device, at least one of: the MCS, the signal strength, or transmission power corresponding to the one or more hidden nodes (Barriac[0048] In another aspect, the first wireless device 305 may determine the MCS to transmit the frame 335 based on the received channel feedback. The first wireless device 305 may determine the MCS by determining a time period during which a set of MCSs is valid) within a transmission channel. The first wireless device 305 may select an MCS among the set of MCSs based on which MCS is associated with the highest expected throughput.
[0049] Subsequently, the first wireless device 305 may transmit the frame 335 to the second wireless device 310 based on the adjusted frame size. The transmission may also be based on an adjusted MCS.).
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective
filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Verma as modified by Barriac with Barriac’s above teachings. The motivation is improving data transmission (Barriac [0036]).
Regarding claim 18, Verma in view of Barriac teaches The access point of claim 17, comprising
the one or more processors to:
Verma does not explicitly teach determine, from the information, that all of the MPDUs within the one or more AMPDUs failed to be received by the device.
Barriac teaches determine, from the information, that all of the MPDUs within the one or more AMPDUs failed to be received by the device (Barriac Fig. 3, [0040] FIG. 3 is a call flow diagram 300 illustrating a method of determining a frame size based on channel feedback in acknowledgement (ACK) or block ACK (BACK) frames. Referring to FIG. 3, a first wireless device 305 may communicate over a connection with a second wireless device 310. In one aspect, the first wireless device 305 may be a STA, and the second wireless device 310 may be an AP, or vice versa.
[0042] Based on the number of successfully received frames and/or the measured SINR/SNR of each of the frames, the second wireless device may determine 320 channel feedback on the channel(s) on which the one or more frames 315 was transmitted. In one aspect, the channel feedback may include the measured SINR associated with each one of the one or more frames 315 (or subframes) received by the second wireless device 310.
In one another aspect, the channel feedback may be pass/fail ACK information.
[0043] After determining the channel feedback, the second wireless device 310 may transmit the channel feedback in an ACK frame 325 (or block ACK (BACK) frame) associated with the received one or more frames.).
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective
filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Verma as modified by Barriac with Barriac’s above teachings. The motivation is improving data transmission (Barriac [0036]).
Regarding claim 20, Verma in view of Barriac teaches The device of claim 19, comprising the one
or more processors to:
Verma teaches identify the low latency packet within the next PPDU scheduled for transmission via a next TXOP following the current TXOP (Verma slide 14,
PNG
media_image3.png
200
400
media_image3.png
Greyscale
As shown in the above Fig, the low latency packet within the next PPDU in the next TXOP following the current TXOP.); and
determine to insert the low latency packet into the PPDU (Verma slide 14,
PNG
media_image2.png
200
400
media_image2.png
Greyscale
As shown in the above Fig, the low latency packet is inserted into the PPDU.).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to David Z Sun whose telephone number is (571)270-0750. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 0800am-0500pm.
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, Moo Jeong can be reached at 571-272-9617. 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.
/D.Z.S./Examiner, Art Unit 2418
/Moo Jeong/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2418
Prosecution Insights