DETAILED ACTION
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Claims 1-20 are pending in Instant Application.
Priority
No priority claimed.
Election/Restrictions
Restriction to one of the following inventions is required under 35 U.S.C. 121:
I. Claims 1-16, drawn to “An apparatus for communication in a wireless network, the apparatus comprising a media access control (MAC) transmitter scheduler configured to perform one or more operations comprising: in response to determining that a transmission opportunity (TXOP) is available”, classified in H04W74/04.
II. Claims 17-20, drawn to “An apparatus for communication in a wireless network, the apparatus comprising a media access control (MAC) transmitter scheduler configured to perform one or more operations comprising: in response to or after starting a backoff counter, at a first time”, classified in H04W28/02.
Inventions 1 and 2 are related as combination and subcombination. Inventions in this relationship are distinct if it can be shown that (1) the combination as claimed does not require the particulars of the subcombination as claimed for patentability, and (2) that the subcombination has utility by itself or in other combinations (MPEP § 806.05(c)). In the instant case, the combination as claimed does not require the particulars of the subcombination as claimed because they are distinct and they do not overlap in scope and are not obvious variants. The subcombination has separate utility such as “An apparatus for communication in a wireless network, the apparatus comprising a media access control (MAC) transmitter scheduler configured to perform one or more operations comprising: in response to determining that a transmission opportunity (TXOP) is available”.
The examiner has required restriction between combination and subcombination inventions. Where applicant elects a subcombination, and claims thereto are subsequently found allowable, any claim(s) depending from or otherwise requiring all the limitations of the allowable subcombination will be examined for patentability in accordance with 37 CFR 1.104. See MPEP § 821.04(a). Applicant is advised that if any claim presented in a continuation or divisional application is anticipated by, or includes all the limitations of, a claim that is allowable in the present application, such claim may be subject to provisional statutory and/or nonstatutory double patenting rejections over the claims of the instant application.
During a telephone conversation with Weigo Chen on June 22, 2026 a provisional election was made without traverse to prosecute the invention of “An apparatus for communication in a wireless network, the apparatus comprising a media access control (MAC) transmitter scheduler configured to perform one or more operations comprising: in response to determining that a transmission opportunity (TXOP) is available”, claims 1-16. Claim 17-20 withdrawn from further consideration by the examiner, 37 CFR 1.142(b), as being drawn to a non-elected invention.
Claims 17-20 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b), as being drawn to a nonelected invention, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Election was made without traverse in a telephone interview with Weigo Chen on June 22, 2026.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
Claims 1-16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
The term “about” in claim 1 is a relative term which renders the claim indefinite. The term “wherein a total length of the one or more MPDUs is about to reach the total aggregated MPDU length” is not defined by the claim, the specification does not provide a standard for ascertaining the requisite degree, and one of ordinary skill in the art would not be reasonably apprised of the scope of the invention.
Claims 6, 11 and 14 are rejected for the same reason as set forth above for claim 1.
Claims 2-5, 7-10, 12-13 and 15-6 are also rejected, since they are dependent on the rejected base independent claims 1, 6, 11 and 14, respectfully, as set forth above.
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 of this title, 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.
Claims 1-4, 6-9 and 11-16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Peng et al. (US Pub. No.: 2025/0133594), and further in view of Chu et al. (US Pub. No.: 2020/0336934).
As per claim 1, Peng disclose An apparatus (see Fig.7, a wireless communication device) for communication in a wireless network (see para. 0074-0075, communication in a wireless network, Wi-Fi AP or Wi-Fi stations), the apparatus comprising a media access control (MAC) transmitter scheduler (see Fig.7, para. 0076, wireless communication control circuit 710A) configured to perform one or more operations comprising:
in response to determining that a transmission opportunity (TXOP) is available (see para. 0077, when/determining there is a transmission (TX) opportunity):
determining a total aggregated MAC protocol data unit (MPDU) length based at least on a total number of data bytes to transmit and an MPDU size (see para. 0077-0078, determining/calculating, a total aggregated MAC protocol data unit (MPDU) length based at least on a total number of data bytes to transmit and an MPDU size);
transmitting a transmission (TX) start command using the total aggregated MPDU length (see para. 0077-0078, 0083, sending/transmitting a transmission (TX) start command using the total aggregated MPDU length);
aggregating a plurality of MAC service data units (MSDUs) to determine one or more MPDUs to be transmitted (see para. 0077-0078, the aggregation and transmission units 712A perform MPDU aggregation to generate PPDU / aggregating a plurality of MSDUs, and transmission of the PPDU is performed by the aggregation and transmission units 712A within the specified time), wherein a total length of the one or more MPDUs is shorter or longer the total aggregated MPDU length (see Fig.10, para. 0106-0109, in step 1045, a decision evaluation is performed by the aggregation and transmission unit. The decision evaluation is for deciding whether the A-MPDU of the PPDU has the byte length shorter than the A-MPDU length lower bound or longer than the A-MPDU length upper bound, which means for deciding whether the end time of the PPDU is to be either before the start of the synchronization collision period or after the end of the synchronization collision period. The decision evaluation is also for deciding that whether aggregating all MPUDs in the MPDU list causes the A-MPDU has a byte length closer to either the A-MPDU length lower bound or the A-MPDU length upper bound. When aggregating all MPUDs in the MPDU list causes the A-MPDU has a byte length closer to the A-MPDU length lower bound, then it is decided to aggregate the MPDUs in the MPDU list based on the counter C1 and thus the A-MPUD has a byte length shorter than the A-MPUD length lower bound);
determining a frame including the one or more MPDUs to be transmitted and a padding such that a length of the frame equals the total aggregated MPDU length (see Fig.7, Fig.8. Fig. 9, para. 0094-0099, in step 940, determining a frame wherein the aggregation and transmission unit aggregates the MPDUs in the MPDU list and extra padding into the PPDU and holds the aggregated MPDUs, see also Fig.10, para. 0107-0109); and
transmitting a TX command to transmit the frame within an allowed time from when the TXOP is available (see Fig.7-9, para. 0077-0078, 0094-0099, when there is a transmission (TX) opportunity, transmission of the PPDU / a TX command to transmit the frame, is performed by the aggregation and transmission units 712A within the specified time / within an allowed time).
Although Peng disclose aggregating a plurality of MAC service data units (MSDUs) to determine one or more MPDUs to be transmitted;
Peng however does not explicitly disclose wherein a total length of the one or more MPDUs is about to reach the total aggregated MPDU length;
Chu however disclose an apparatus aggregating a plurality of MAC service data units (MSDUs) to determine one or more MPDUs to be transmitted wherein a total length of the one or more MPDUs is about to reach the total aggregated MPDU length (see Fig.30, para. 0120-0122, the aggregated control subfield 3024 includes one or more control subfields 3030 and one or more padding bits 3032 (e.g., to reach a total length of 30 bits for the aggregated control subfield 3024) / a total length of the one or more MPDUs is about to reach the total aggregated MPDU length) and determining a frame including the one or more MPDUs to be transmitted and a padding such that a length of the frame equals the total aggregated MPDU length (see Fig.30, para. 0120-0122, where the control ID subfield 3040 indicates a fixed length and format of the corresponding control information subfield 3042, the client station 25 generates the control subfield 3030 to include buffer information corresponding to queued media access control (MAC) protocol data units (MPDUs) that are queued for transmission / determining a frame including the one or more MPDUs to be transmitted and a padding)
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide the functionality of wherein a total length of the one or more MPDUs is about to reach the total aggregated MPDU length, as taught by Chu, in the system of Peng, so as to generate a resource request frame (e.g., resource request MPDU), the resource request frame indicates buffer information corresponding to frames of the STA that are queued for transmission, the resource request frame indicates buffer information corresponding to a transmission opportunity (TXOP) having an indicated duration, the resource request frame includes a scale factor for the buffer information to provide an increased range of available values for the buffer information and thus improved accuracy of resource requests, see Chu, paragraphs 46-47.
As per claim 2, the combination of Peng and Chu disclose the apparatus of claim 1,
Peng further disclose wherein the MPDU size is one of a maximum MPDU size, an average MPDU size, a minimal MPDU size, or an average MSDU size (see para. 0086, wherein the MPDU size is one of a maximum MPDU size/ A-MPDU length upper bound , an average MPDU size, a minimal MPDU size /A-MPDU length lower bound, or an average MSDU size).
As per claim 3, the combination of Peng and Chu disclose the apparatus of claim 1,
Chu further disclose wherein aggregating the plurality of MSDUs to determine the one or more MPDUs to be transmitted comprises, for each of the one or more MPDUs to be transmitted (see Fig. 10-11, para. 0082, the A-MPDU 1000 that includes an MPDU for each of the plurality of resource requests, for example, a plurality of the MPDUs 800): determining a respective MPDU frame including one or more MSDUs and a padding such that a length of the MPDU frame equals the MPDU size (see Fig. 10-11, para. 0082, the A-MPDU 1000 includes an MPDU delimiter 1002, an MPDU 1004, and padding 1006 for each included MPDU, also an MPDU length subfield 1106, the respective MPDU frame including one or more MSDUs and a padding such that a length of the MPDU frame equals the MPDU size).
As per claim 4, the combination of Peng and Chu disclose the apparatus of claim 1,
Peng further disclose wherein the total number of data bytes to transmit is determined based on a maximum number of MPDUs and the MPDU size (see para. 0078, 0088-0093, 0097-0098, aggregating MPDUs in the MPDU list into the A-MPDU causes the A-MPDU having a byte length longer than the A- MPDU length upper bound, the total number of data bytes to transmit is determined based on a maximum number of MPDUs and the MPDU size).
As per claim 6, claim 6 is rejected the same way as claim 1.
As per claim 7, claim 7 is rejected the same way as claim 2.
As per claim 8, claim 8 is rejected the same way as claim 3.
As per claim 9, claim 9 is rejected the same way as claim 4.
As per claim 11, claim 11 is rejected the same way as claim 1.
As per claim 13, claim 13 is rejected the same way as claim 3.
As per claim 14, claim 14 is rejected the same way as claim 1.
As per claim 16, claim 16 is rejected the same way as claim 3.
Claims 12 and 15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Peng et al. (US Pub. No.: 2025/0133594), in view of Chu et al. (US Pub. No.: 2020/0336934) and further in view of Cariou et al. (US Pub. No.: 2017/0331734).
As per claim 12, the combination of Peng and Chu disclose the apparatus of claim 11.
The combination of Peng and Chu however does not explicitly disclose wherein determining the total aggregated MAC protocol data unit (MPDU) length is additionally based on a modulation and coding scheme (MCS) and bandwidth (BW) associated with the TXOP.
Cariou however disclose wherein determining a total aggregated MAC protocol data unit (MPDU) length is additionally based on a modulation and coding scheme (MCS) and bandwidth (BW) associated with the TXOP (see Fig.8. para. 0083-0085, MPDU length is based on a modulation and coding scheme (MCS) and bandwidth (BW) associated with the TXOP, see also claims 17-23).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide the functionality of wherein determining a total aggregated MAC protocol data unit (MPDU) length is additionally based on a modulation and coding scheme (MCS) and bandwidth (BW) associated with the TXOP, as taught by Cariou, in the system of Peng and Chu, so as to receive a medium access control protocol data unit (MPDU) encoded in accordance with a first modulation and coding scheme (MCS), see Cariou, paragraphs 37-38.
As per claim 15, claim 15 is rejected the same way as claim 12.
XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
Second Rejection:
Claims 1, 6, 11 and 14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Peng et al. (US Pub. No.: 2025/0133594), and further in view of Adachi et al. (US Pub. No.: 2018/0077723).
As per claim 1, Peng disclose An apparatus (see Fig.7, a wireless communication device) for communication in a wireless network (see para. 0074-0075, communication in a wireless network, Wi-Fi AP or Wi-Fi stations), the apparatus comprising a media access control (MAC) transmitter scheduler (see Fig.7, para. 0076, wireless communication control circuit 710A) configured to perform one or more operations comprising:
in response to determining that a transmission opportunity (TXOP) is available (see para. 0077, when/determining there is a transmission (TX) opportunity):
determining a total aggregated MAC protocol data unit (MPDU) length based at least on a total number of data bytes to transmit and an MPDU size (see para. 0077-0078, determining/calculating, a total aggregated MAC protocol data unit (MPDU) length based at least on a total number of data bytes to transmit and an MPDU size);
transmitting a transmission (TX) start command using the total aggregated MPDU length (see para. 0077-0078, 0083, sending/transmitting a transmission (TX) start command using the total aggregated MPDU length);
aggregating a plurality of MAC service data units (MSDUs) to determine one or more MPDUs to be transmitted (see para. 0077-0078, the aggregation and transmission units 712A perform MPDU aggregation to generate PPDU / aggregating a plurality of MSDUs, and transmission of the PPDU is performed by the aggregation and transmission units 712A within the specified time), wherein a total length of the one or more MPDUs is shorter or longer the total aggregated MPDU length (see Fig.10, para. 0106-0109, in step 1045, a decision evaluation is performed by the aggregation and transmission unit. The decision evaluation is for deciding whether the A-MPDU of the PPDU has the byte length shorter than the A-MPDU length lower bound or longer than the A-MPDU length upper bound, which means for deciding whether the end time of the PPDU is to be either before the start of the synchronization collision period or after the end of the synchronization collision period. The decision evaluation is also for deciding that whether aggregating all MPUDs in the MPDU list causes the A-MPDU has a byte length closer to either the A-MPDU length lower bound or the A-MPDU length upper bound. When aggregating all MPUDs in the MPDU list causes the A-MPDU has a byte length closer to the A-MPDU length lower bound, then it is decided to aggregate the MPDUs in the MPDU list based on the counter C1 and thus the A-MPUD has a byte length shorter than the A-MPUD length lower bound);
determining a frame including the one or more MPDUs to be transmitted and a padding such that a length of the frame equals the total aggregated MPDU length (see Fig.7, Fig.8. Fig. 9, para. 0094-0099, in step 940, determining a frame wherein the aggregation and transmission unit aggregates the MPDUs in the MPDU list and extra padding into the PPDU and holds the aggregated MPDUs); and
transmitting a TX command to transmit the frame within an allowed time from when the TXOP is available (see Fig.7-9, para. 0077-0078, 0094-0099, when there is a transmission (TX) opportunity, transmission of the PPDU / a TX command to transmit the frame, is performed by the aggregation and transmission units 712A within the specified time / within an allowed time).
Although Peng disclose aggregating a plurality of MAC service data units (MSDUs) to determine one or more MPDUs to be transmitted;
Peng however does not explicitly disclose wherein a total length of the one or more MPDUs is about to reach the total aggregated MPDU length;
Adachi however disclose wherein a total length of the one or more MPDUs is about to reach the total aggregated MPDU length (see Fig.11, para. 0125-0127, 0135-0137, when a condition relating to the data length such as the PPDU length is designated by trigger frame 507, the data frame is generated and transmitted so that the condition of the data length is satisfied. When the PPDU length does not satisfy the designated value, for example, padding data may be added to the end of the MAC frame or for the time of shortage, no data may be transmitted (null data may be transmitted) / a total length of the one or more MPDUs is about to reach the total aggregated MPDU length)
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide the functionality of wherein a total length of the one or more MPDUs is about to reach the total aggregated MPDU length, as taught by Adachi, in the system of Peng, so as to improve system efficiency by effectively using the transmission period, see Adachi, paragraphs 4-5.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 5 and 10 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Adachi (US Pub. No.:2018/0062713) – see para. 0107-0108, “The data amount may be a number of pieces of data present in the transmission queue in each AC (here, it is assumed to be MSDU but it may be PPDU or other PDU or SDU) or a size of each MSDU or both of them. Alternatively, it may be a total data size of MSDU remaining in the transmission queue. Moreover, it may be a time length, not the size. Other than those described here, it may be anything as long as it is information that can specify the data amount. When transmission is to be carried out by transmission by an aggregation frame (A-MPDU or A-MSDU, etc.), for example, it may be information on how many aggregation frames are present. A quantizing method in expressing the data amount may be an arbitrary method. It may be assumed that a basic unit is 32 μs which is a time length, and the data amount may be expressed by integer times of 32 μs, for example. At this time, if a field length for setting the data amount is 8 bits, 32 μs to 8160 μs can be expressed, for example. The 32 μs is an example, and a time length with another size may be also used as a basic unit. Moreover, 8 bits are also an example, and a field length with another length may be also used. Moreover, as another quantizing method, it may be assumed that the basic unit is 4096 octets which is a size, and the data amount may be expressed by integer times of 4096 octets”.
Ghosh (US Pub, No.:2017/0078003) – see Fig.5A-G, para. 0062, “The A-MPDU density field 536 may indicate the number of MPDUs to be placed in the A-MPDU field or provide the amount of gap or padding within the A-MPDU packet to indicate the number of MPDU packets within the aggregated MPDU and how those packets are to be placed within the A-MPDU. Thus, the A-MPDU density field 536 indicates how closely spaced the MPDU packets are to be within the A-MPDU”.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to LAKERAM JANGBAHADUR whose telephone number is (571)272-1335. The examiner can normally be reached on M-F 7 am - 4 pm.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Ian Moore can be reached on 571-272-3085. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/LAKERAM JANGBAHADUR/
Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2469
Prosecution Insights