DETAILED ACTION
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.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 1-13 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.
Claim 1 recites the limitation a receiver node "make a determination that a packet is an obsolete packet” in lines 4-5. It is not clear if a receiver node or a transmitter node determines whether a packet is an obsolete or not. Applicant’s Figs.3A-C show that a transmitter node determines “packet considered as obsolete.” Further, applicant’s specification defines at ¶.[0075] that “the transmitter node 22 making a determination that a packet is an obsolete packet and a processor circuitry of the transmitter node 22 sending an obsolete packet indication, e.g., an obsolete packet indication message to the receiver node 24 after determining the a packet is obsolete.”
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)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1-13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being unpatentable by Fan et al. (US 2025/0379705, “Fan”).
Regarding claim 1, Fan discloses a receiver node of a telecommunications system, the node comprising:
- interface circuitry configured to receive packets over a radio interface from a transmitter node of the telecommunications system (See Fig.6, RX RLC receives ‘an RLC SDU (SN=x)’);
- processor circuitry configured to make a determination that a packet is an obsolete packet (See Fig.6, ‘in this case, the RLC SDU (SN=x) is useless after RX RLC transmitted RLC status report;
PNG
media_image1.png
287
561
media_image1.png
Greyscale
See ¶.5, after the RLC entity uses the ARQ mechanism in the AM mode for transmission, if quality of a lower-layer transmission link is poor, the data packet may expire and be useless after several retransmissions; See ¶.29, The second indication includes a sequence number of a second data packet in the RLC entity of the first communication apparatus, and the second indication indicates that a first variable of the second data packet is greater than or equal to a first threshold, or indicates that the second data packet expires and is useless; See ¶.39, the second indication indicates that a first variable of the second data packet is greater than or equal to a first threshold, or indicates that the second data packet expires and is useless; See ¶.141, As shown in FIG. 6, a delay budget of the RLC SDU whose SN is equal to x is reached when an RLC status report is received again after a first retransmission. In this case, the data packet expires and is useless).
Regarding claim 2, Fan discloses “make the determination that the packet is the obsolete packet when the packet has not completely been received by the interface circuitry (See Fig.6, Fig.8, and ¶.184, the NACK information herein may be indicated by using NACK_SN corresponding to SN1 to SN3, to indicate that the RLC SDUs corresponding to SN1 to SN3 are not successfully received).”
Regarding claim 3, Fan discloses “discard all stored segments of the packet upon making the determination (See ¶.21, if the first data packet or the segment in the first data packet is received, and the first variable of the first data packet is greater than or equal to the first threshold, discarding the received first data packet or the received segment in the first data packet. That is, when the first variable of the first data packet is greater than or equal to the first threshold, the first data packet is discarded even if the first data packet or the segment in the first data packet is not previously successfully received, so that the received first data packet or the received segment in the first data packet is discarded, to avoid continued processing and delivery of a data packet that expires).”
Regarding claim 4, Fan discloses “update a state variable which holds a value of a sequence number (SN) following the last in-sequence completely received radio link control (RLC) SDU (See ¶.18, the receiving-side variable includes a receiving-side next to-be-received sequence number variable, for example. RX_NEXT; and updating the receiving-side variable includes: if the first variable of the first data packet is greater than or equal to the first threshold, and a sequence number of the first data packet is equal to RX_NEXT, updating RX_NEXT to a sequence number of a next unsuccessfully received data packet whose first variable is less than the first threshold. In this way, the first communication apparatus can update RX_NEXT to a sequence number of a next unsuccessfully received data packet for which the maximum quantity of NACK feedback times is not reached. RX_NEXT is used as a lower boundary value of a receive window; and RX_NEXT is updated, so that a minimum value of a sequence number of a to-be-received data packet is increased. This helps avoid transmission of data that expires, and can improve data transmission effectiveness).”
Regarding claim 5, Fan discloses “update the state variable to a sequence number of a first RLC packet (1) which has a sequence number greater than the current value of the state variable for an packet for which not all bytes have been received and (2) which is not considered as an obsolete packet (See ¶.18-20, updating of receiving side state variables such as RX_NEXT, RX_Next_Highest, RX_Highest_Status, RX_Next_Status_Trigger; See further ¶.128-138, ¶.195-199, and ¶.253-255 for the details of the four state variables).”
Regarding claim 6, Fan discloses “make the determination that the packet is the obsolete packet in dependence upon a value of a highest received state variable, and wherein the highest received state variable indicates a value of a sequence number following a sequence number of a radio link control (RLC) packet which as a highest sequence number among received RLC packets (See cited paragraphs in claim 5 for RX_Highest_Status).”
Regarding claim 7, Fan discloses “make the determination when the highest received state variable is greater than a sequence number (SN) of the packet for a predetermined time (See ¶.19, the receiving-side variable includes a receiving-side highest status variable, for example, RX_Highest_Status; and updating the receiving-side variable includes: if the first variable of the first data packet is greater than or equal to the first threshold, and a sequence number of the first data packet is equal to RX_Highest_Status, updating RX_Highest_Status to a sequence number of a next unsuccessfully received data packet whose first variable is less than the first threshold. In this way, the first communication apparatus can update RX_Highest_Status to an SN of a next unsuccessfully received data packet for which the maximum quantity of NACK feedback times is not reached. RX_Highest_Status is updated, so that a value of ACK_SN indicated in a to-be-generated RLC STATUS PDU is increased; See ¶.20, if a reassembly timer expires, updating RX_Highest_Status to a value that is greater than or equal to RX_Next_Status_Trigger and greater than or equal to a sequence number of an unsuccessfully received data packet whose first variable is less than the first threshold; See further ¶.47, ¶.125, and ¶.198).”
Regarding claim 8, Fan discloses “determines the predetermined time with reference to a timer configured to radio link control signaling (¶.16 and ¶.18, a maximum quantity of feedback times is reached; See ¶.26, an indication includes a time threshold; See ¶.125, a reassembly timer (for example, t-Reassembly) maintained by the AM RLC entity on the receiving side expires. An RLC entity maintains a reassembly timer to detect a packet loss at the lower layer. After an RLC PDU is received, if there is a gap in a receive window on a receiving side and the reassembly timer is not running, the reassembly timer is started; See further ¶.132, ¶.141, and ¶.123).”
Regarding claim 9, Fan discloses “maintains a separate timer for each of plural packets for which all bytes have not been received (See ¶.198, update RX_Highest_Status to an SN of a next unsuccessfully received data packet for which a maximum quantity of NACK feedback times is not reached. RX_Highest_Status is updated, so that a value of ACK_SN indicated in a to-be-generated RLC STATUS PDU can be increased. This can avoid a data loss).”
Regarding claim 10, Fan discloses “make the determination that the packet is the obsolete packet in dependence upon a counter value for each packet to check how many times a reassembly timer expires while a reassembly timer state variable is below the sequence number of the packet, and wherein the reassembly timer state variable indicates a value of a sequence number following a sequence number of the radio link control (RLC) packet which triggered a reassembly timer (See ¶.47, the receiving-side variable includes RX_Highest_Status and RX_Next_Status_Trigger; and the processing unit is configured to: if a reassembly timer expires, update RX_Highest_Status to a value that is greater than or equal to RX_Next_Status_Trigger and greater than or equal to a sequence number of an unsuccessfully received data packet whose first variable is less than the first threshold; See ¶.261, ¶.267-282 for t-Reassembly expires and RX_Next_Status_Trigger to RX_Next_Highest; See ¶.379-¶.382, RX_Next_Reassembly to a value before RX_Next_Highest).”
Regarding claim 11, Fan discloses “update a reassembly timer state variable which indicates a value of a sequence number following a SN of the radio link control (RLC) packet which triggered a reassembly timer (See ¶.125, a reassembly timer (for example, t-Reassembly) maintained by the AM RLC entity on the receiving side expires. An RLC entity maintains a reassembly timer to detect a packet loss at the lower layer. After an RLC PDU is received, if there is a gap in a receive window on a receiving side and the reassembly timer is not running, the reassembly timer is started. For example, if SNs of received data packets are equal to {1, 2, 3, 5, 6}, an SN of an unreceived data packet is equal to 4. If the reassembly timer is not running in this case, the reassembly timer is started. If the reassembly timer is run and does not expire. no new reassembly timer is started; See ¶.131, RX_Next_Status_Trigger: This variable records a next SN value of an RLC SDU that triggers t-Reassembly; See ¶.255, the receiving-side variable includes RX_Highest_Status and RX_Next_Status_Trigger; and the processing unit is configured to: if a reassembly timer expires, update RX_Highest_Status to a value that is greater than or equal to RX_Next_Status_Trigger and greater than or equal to a sequence number of an unsuccessfully received data packet whose first variable is less than the first threshold).”
Regarding claim 12, Fan discloses “update the reassembly timer state variable to a sequence number greater than a sequence number of the obsolete packet (See ¶.20, the receiving-side variable includes RX_Highest_Status and a receiving-side next to-be-received sequence number variable, for example, RX_Next_Status_Trigger; and updating the receiving-side variable includes: if a reassembly timer expires, updating RX_Highest_Status to a value that is greater than or equal to RX_Next_Status_Trigger and greater than or equal to a sequence number of an unsuccessfully received data packet whose first variable is less than the first threshold. In this way, if a retransmission timer expires, the first communication apparatus triggers uploading of the status report. In this case, RX_Highest_Status may be updated to a maximum value between RX_Next_Status_Trigger and a value that is greater than or equal to the sequence number of the unsuccessfully received data packet whose first variable is less than the first threshold, so that a value of ACK_SN indicated in a to-be-generated RLC STATUS PDU is increased. This can avoid a data loss; See ¶.47, the receiving-side variable includes RX_Highest_Status and RX_Next_Status_Trigger; and the processing unit is configured to: if a reassembly timer expires, update RX_Highest_Status to a value that is greater than or equal to RX_Next_Status_Trigger and greater than or equal to a sequence number of an unsuccessfully received data packet whose first variable is less than the first threshold; See ¶.255, the receiving-side variable includes RX_Highest_Status and RX_Next_Status_Trigger; and the processing unit 1302 is configured to: if a reassembly timer expires, update RX_Highest_Status to a value that is greater than or equal to RX_Next_Status_Trigger and greater than or equal to a sequence number of an unsuccessfully received data packet whose first variable is less than the first threshold).”
Regarding claim 13, it is a method claim corresponding to the receiver node claim 1 and is therefore rejected for the similar reasons set forth in the rejection of the claim.
Contact Information
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Jung H Park whose telephone number is 571-272-8565. The examiner can normally be reached M-F: 7:00 AM-3:00 PM.
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, Derrick Ferris can be reached on 571-272-3123. 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.
/JUNG H PARK/
Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2411
Prosecution Insights