DETAILED ACTION
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 .
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.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 6/23/2024 is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
Drawings
The drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a) because they fail to include detail that is essential for a proper understanding of the disclosed invention. For example, FIG. 8 and FIG. 9 are just empty boxes of the flow chart and should explicitly include the steps performed as described in the specification. Any structural detail that is essential for a proper understanding of the disclosed invention should be shown in the drawing. MPEP § 608.02(d). Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
Specification
The abstract of the disclosure is objected to because it should be in narrative form and form and legal phraseology often used in patent claims should be avoided. A corrected abstract of the disclosure is required and must be presented on a separate sheet, apart from any other text. See MPEP § 608.01(b).
Applicant is reminded of the proper language and format for an abstract of the disclosure.
The abstract should be in narrative form and generally limited to a single paragraph on a separate sheet within the range of 50 to 150 words in length. The abstract should describe the disclosure sufficiently to assist readers in deciding whether there is a need for consulting the full patent text for details.
The language should be clear and concise and should not repeat information given in the title. It should avoid using phrases which can be implied, such as, “The disclosure concerns,” “The disclosure defined by this invention,” “The disclosure describes,” etc. In addition, the form and legal phraseology often used in patent claims, such as “means” and “said,” should be avoided.
The lengthy specification has not been checked to the extent necessary to determine the presence of all possible minor errors. Applicant’s cooperation is requested in correcting any errors of which applicant may become aware in the specification.
Claim Objections
Claims 16-22, 26 and 28-31 are objected to because of the following informalities:
Regarding claims 16, 26 and 28, “a radio link control, RLC,” should be changed to “a radio link control (RLC)” for clarity. Appropriate correction is required.
Regarding claims 21, 26 and 30, “an indication” of “an indication that the data packet has not been successfully received” should be changed to “the indication” because it appears to be the same “indication” as recited in the respective parent claim. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Interpretation
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(f):
(f) Element in Claim for a Combination. – An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The claims in this application are given their broadest reasonable interpretation using the plain meaning of the claim language in light of the specification as it would be understood by one of ordinary skill in the art. The broadest reasonable interpretation of a claim element (also commonly referred to as a claim limitation) is limited by the description in the specification when 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is invoked.
As explained in MPEP § 2181, subsection I, claim limitations that meet the following three-prong test will be interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
(A) the claim limitation uses the term “means” or “step” or a term used as a substitute for “means” that is a generic placeholder (also called a nonce term or a non-structural term having no specific structural meaning) for performing the claimed function;
(B) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is modified by functional language, typically, but not always linked by the transition word “for” (e.g., “means for”) or another linking word or phrase, such as “configured to” or “so that”; and
(C) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is not modified by sufficient structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function.
Use of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim with functional language creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites sufficient structure, material, or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Absence of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is not to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is not interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites function without reciting sufficient structure, material or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Claim limitations in this application that use the word “means” (or “step”) are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action. Conversely, claim limitations in this application that do not use the word “means” (or “step”) are not being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action.
A review of the specification shows that the following appears to be the corresponding acts and structure described in the specification for the 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph limitation: Fig. 2; Fig. 3; [0089]-[0097].
Because these claim limitations are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, they are being interpreted to cover the corresponding structure described in the specification as performing the claimed function, and equivalents thereof.
If applicant does not intend to have these limitations interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, applicant may: (1) amend the claim limitation(s) to avoid them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph (e.g., by reciting sufficient structure to perform the claimed function); or (2) present a sufficient showing that the claim limitations recite sufficient structure to perform the claimed function so as to avoid them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a):
(a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention.
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112:
The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor of carrying out his invention.
Claims 16-31 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, first paragraph, because the claim purports to invoke 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, but fails to recite a combination of elements as required by that statutory provision and thus cannot rely on the specification to provide the structure, material or acts to support the claimed function. As such, the claim recites a function that has no limits and covers every conceivable means for achieving the stated function, while the specification discloses at most only those means known to the inventor. Accordingly, the disclosure is not commensurate with the scope of the claim.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 16-31 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by US 2008/0298322 (hereinafter Chun).
Regarding claims 16, 23 and 28, Chun discloses an apparatus for a receiver, the apparatus comprising means for performing: receiving, at a lower protocol layer of the receiver from a lower protocol layer of a transmitter, an indication of when a first retransmission mechanism between the transmitter and receiver at the lower protocol layer will terminate ([0085]: details When the transmitter performs the final HARQ process of a specific data block, the transmitter can transmit particular information indicating that the final HARQ of the specific data block is being transmitted, through the physical layer); causing retransmission of a data packet according to the first retransmission mechanism ([0083]: details When an error is detected from the data block, the Rx HARQ transmits an NACK signal to the Tx HARQ (S520). The Tx HARQ transmits the retransmission data block to the Rx HARQ (S530). An error is detected in the second transmission and the Rx HARQ transmits the NACK signal to the Tx HARQ (S540). In this way, the transmission can be repeated by L times which is the maximum allowable number of times (S550)); determining, at the lower protocol layer of the receiver using the received indication, that the first retransmission mechanism has been completed in respect of the data packet ([0084]: details When an error is detected in the final transmission, the Rx RLC is requested for constructing the status report information (S555); FIG. 8, S555: “NACK”); and signaling, from the lower protocol layer of the receiver to a radio link control, RLC, protocol layer of the receiver, an indication that the data packet has not been received (FIG. 8, S555: “NACK” signaling from Rx HARQ to Rx RLC of RECEIVER 750).
Regarding claims 17 and 29, Chun discloses the apparatus further comprising means for performing: causing, by the RLC protocol layer of the receiver in response to said signaling, retransmission of the data packet at the RLC protocol layer using a second retransmission mechanism, wherein the lower protocol layer comprises a physical protocol layer and/or a medium access control protocol layer ([0083][0084]: details receiver RLC creates status report information which is reported to Tx RLC; even when an error occurs from the ACK/NACK signal, the RLC can accurately judge whether the retransmission should be performed on the basis of the status report information).
Regarding claims 18 and 24, Chun discloses wherein the received indication indicates a maximum number of transmissions of a data packet, and the means for determining that the first retransmission mechanism has been completed comprises means for: determining that the number of transmissions of the data packet equals the maximum number of transmissions ([0083]-[0085]: details the transmission can be repeated by L times which is the maximum allowable number of times (S550); When an error is detected in the final transmission… When the transmitter performs the final HARQ process of a specific data block, the transmitter can transmit particular information indicating that the final HARQ of the specific data block is being transmitted, through the physical layer).
Regarding claim 19, Chun discloses wherein the means for determining that the number of transmissions of the data packet equals the maximum number of transmissions comprises means for: initializing a counter that tracks a number of transmissions of the data packet at the lower protocol layer; and identifying when a current value of the counter equals either zero or the maximum number of transmissions of the data packet ([0083]-[0085] and [0106]: details accurately judge… timer expires, as counter).
Regarding claims 20 and 25, Chun discloses wherein the received indication indicates that a current and/or next transmission of the data packet is the last transmission of the data packet using the first retransmission mechanism, and the means for determining that the first retransmission mechanism has been completed comprises means for: detecting the indication that indicates that the current and/or next transmission of the data packet is the last transmission of the data packet using the first retransmission mechanism ([0083]-[0085]: details Tx HARQ transmits the retransmission data block to the Rx HARQ (S530); When an error is detected in the final transmission, as last transmission; the transmitter can transmit particular information indicating that the final HARQ of the specific data block is being transmitted, through the physical layer).
Regarding claims 21, 26 and 30, Chun discloses the apparatus further comprising means for performing: initializing, at the RLC protocol layer of the receiver, a timer when the RLC protocol layer of the receiver detects that the data packet has not been correctly received; and terminating the timer early in response to said signaling, wherein terminating the timer causes the RLC protocol layer of the receiver to signal, to an RLC protocol layer of the transmitter, an indication that the data packet has not been successfully received (FIG. 8; [0083][0106]: details status report information; The buffer of the RLC entity can use a timer. When a gap is generated in the buffer of the RLC entity, the timer is activated at once. When data corresponding to the gap is not received until the timer expires, it is judged that the gap is generated due to the reception failure and the status report information may be transmitted to the transmitter).
Regarding claims 22, 27 and 31, Chun discloses the apparatus further comprising means for performing: receiving, at the lower protocol layer of the receiver from the lower protocol layer of the transmitter, respective indications of when a first retransmission mechanism between the transmitter and receiver at the lower protocol layer will be completed for respective hybrid automatic repeat request processes established between the transmitter and the receiver ([0071]: details the RLC entity or the logical channel is particularly mapped with the HARQ process… when RB 1 is mapped with HARQ process 1 in one to one, a TSN or a logical channel identifier can be omitted from the data block transmitted to HARQ 1).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Kim (US 2015/0264675) details layer 2 ARQ for packets.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Jasper Kwoh whose telephone number is (408)918-7644. The examiner can normally be reached Tuesday through Friday, 10am to 4pm Pacific.
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, Jeffrey Rutkowski can be reached at (571) 270-1215. 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.
/JASPER KWOH/Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2415
Prosecution Insights