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 .
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 4-10 and 14-20 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.
Claims 4, 6, 9, 14 and 19 recite both "higher-layer encoded packets" and "higher-layer encoded information packets." In claim 6 the first subset is recited as "higher-layer encoded packets" while the further subset is recited as "higher-layer encoded information packets," and in claims 9, 14 and 19 the usage is reversed. Claim 4 recites "higher-layer encoded information packets" for both. It is unclear whether "higher-layer encoded information packets" refers to the same element as "higher-layer encoded packets" or to a distinct element, and if distinct, the term lacks antecedent basis. Claims 5, 7, 8, 10, 15 and 20 are rejected as depending from an indefinite claim.
Claim 17 recites "each further check of the further check blocks block generated based on portions of multiple CBs of the further CBs." The element being defined cannot be determined from the recitation as written.
Claim 16 recites “each check block generated based on portions of multiple CBs of the plurality of CBs,” omitting the phrase “of the plurality of check blocks” recited in claims 1, 6, and 11. It is unclear which check blocks “each check block” refers to. Claims 17-20 are rejected as depending from an indefinite claim.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
The 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) 1-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over “An improved Sliding Window BATS Code,” 2021, 11th International Symposium on Topics in Coding, herein Jayasooria in view of US 2023/0283301 A1 herein Sugai and further in view of US 2020/0259600 A1 herein Cao.
Claim 1, Jayasooriya discloses a method (Abstract, method), comprising: transmitting, to a receiving device in a wireless communication network, a batch of packets to which a subset of higher-layer encoded packets, generated from higher-layer information packets, are mapped (Section II, the source node obtains a degree d by sampling a predetermined degree distribution and uniformly at random chooses d distinct input packets to generate a batch of M coded packets using random linear encoding; the batches generated by the outer code are then transmitted in a network; Section Ill, the encoder divides the data stream to be transmitted into blocks of length w called a window, each block encoded as a standard BATS code generating N_w batches transmitted to the next node, and at the destination node the decoding process starts as soon as it receives N_w batches),
wherein first packets of the higher-layer information packets that are used to generate the subset of higher-layer encoded packets for the batch overlap with second packets of the higher-layer information packets that are used to generate a further subset of the higher-layer encoded packets for mapping to a further batch of packets (Section Ill, after the current block has been encoded the window is moved forward s input packets, named the sliding step, which sets the amount of overlap between subsequent windows, and the new block of w input packets has s new entries whereas w-s are overlapped with the previous window).
Jayasooriya may not explicitly disclose transmitting a plurality of code blocks (CBs) generated based on a batch of physical layer packets; and transmitting, to the receiving device, a plurality of check blocks, each check block of the plurality of check blocks generated based on portions of multiple CBs of the plurality of CBs.
Sugai discloses transmitting a plurality of code blocks (CBs) generated based on a batch of physical layer packets (0065, in the case of the 3GPP standard, when the first coded data matches the length to which the encoding of the second FEC is applied, a plurality of pieces of first coded data may be provided as it is as data for generating a code block; 0114, the transmission device generates a code block by performing encoding of the second FEC on data corresponding to the length to which the second FEC is applied). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Jayasooriya to include generating code blocks in the physical layer from the higher-layer erasure encoded packets, as taught by Sugai, so as to realize high reliability and low latency communication (0235).
Jayasooriya may not explicitly disclose transmitting, to the receiving device, a plurality of check blocks, each check block of the plurality of check blocks generated based on portions of multiple CBs of the plurality of CBs.
Cao discloses transmitting, to the receiving device, a plurality of check blocks, each check block of the plurality of check blocks generated based on portions of multiple CBs of the plurality of CBs (0141, the single parity check CB is encoded across all data code blocks of a TB and generates a parity code block; 0143, a TB is divided into m CBs of equal length k: see equation 1; 0150, the encoder computes each parity CB Pj for 1:5j:5N; 0156, each parity CB is computed by performing an XOR of the m information CBs or cyclic shifts thereof; 0144, the PCB is then FEC encoded and transmitted, and the receiver receives the FEC coded PCB and decodes it). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Jayasooriya to include generating and transmitting a plurality of parity check blocks computed across the code blocks, as taught by Cao, so as to reduce the amount of retransmission data and minimize the number of retransmit bits (0209).
Claim 2, Jayasooriya in view of Sugai and further in view of Cao discloses the method of claim 1.
Jayasooriya discloses transmitting, to the receiving device, further packets generated based on the further batch (Section 111, the BATS code then encodes the new block of w input packets, s of which are new entries, generating batches transmitted to the next node).
Jayasooriya may not explicitly disclose transmitting, to the receiving device, further CBs generated based on the further batch of physical layer packets; and transmitting, to the receiving device, further check blocks, each further check block of the further check blocks generated based on portions of multiple CBs of the further CBs.
Sugai discloses transmitting further CBs generated based on the further batch of physical layer packets (0065, in the case of the 3GPP standard, when the first coded data matches the length to which the encoding of the second FEC is applied, a plurality of pieces of first coded data may be provided as it is as data for generating a code block; 0114, the transmission device generates a code block by performing encoding of the second FEC on data corresponding to the length to which the second FEC is applied). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Jayasooriya to include generating code blocks in the physical layer from the higher-layer erasure encoded packets, as taught by Sugai, so as to realize high reliability and low latency communication (0235).
Jayasooriya may not explicitly disclose transmitting, to the receiving device, further check blocks, each further check block of the further check blocks generated based on portions of multiple CBs of the further CBs.
Cao discloses transmitting, to the receiving device, further check blocks, each further check block of the further check blocks generated based on portions of multiple CBs of the further CBs (0221, the parity CB PCB1 for CBG1 is generated by XORing the CBs of CBG1 and the parity CB PCB1 for CBG2 is generated by XORing the CBs of CBG2, and Device A sends the parity CBs it generated to Device B). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Jayasooriya to include generating and transmitting a plurality of parity check blocks computed across the code blocks, as taught by Cao, so as to reduce the amount of retransmission data and minimize the number of retransmit bits (0209).
Claim 3, Jayasooriya in view of Sugai and further in view of Cao discloses the method of claim 1.
Jayasooriya discloses the higher-layer encoded packets having been generated based on a higher-layer erasure code applied to the higher-layer information packets (Abstract, BATS codes are a class of random linear network coding proposed to transmit a collection of packets through erasure networks, and BATS codes generalize the fountain codes and preserve the rateless properties; Section II, the outer code is a matrix generalization of a traditional fountain code and encodes k input packets into a potentially unlimited number of batches).
Claim 4, Jayasooriya in view of Sugai and further in view of Cao discloses the method of claim 1.
Jayasooriya discloses the first packets comprise a subset of the higher-layer information packets, the second packets comprise a further subset of the higher-layer information packets, and the subset of the higher-layer information packets and the further subset of the higher-layer information packets, from which the subset of the higher-layer encoded information packets and the further subset of the higher-layer encoded information packets are generated, respectively, are different from and overlap with each other (Section Ill, the window is moved forward s input packets and the new block of w input packets has s new entries whereas w-s are overlapped with the previous window; Section IV.A, the input packets of a window are divided into 3 types, Type 1 has w-s input packets belonging to the overlap of window i-1, Type 2 has 2s-w non-overlapping input packets in window i, and Type 3 has w-s input packets belonging to the overlap of window i+1).
Claim 5, Jayasooriya in view of Sugai and further in view of Cao discloses the method of claim 4.
Jayasooriya discloses the subset of the higher-layer information packets includes a first number (d1) of the higher-layer information packets, the further subset of the higher-layer information packets includes a second number (d2) of the higher-layer information packets, d1 and d2 are sampled from a degree distribution, and the first number of higher-layer information packets and the second number of higher-layer information packets in the subset of the higher-layer information packets and the further subset of the higher-layer information packets, respectively, are randomly selected from the higher-layer information packets (Section II, the source node first obtains a degreed with probability of phi_d by sampling a predetermined degree distribution of phi, then uniformly at random chooses d distinct input packets, and the length of Bj is the degree of the jth batch; Section IV.A, the input packets in a window are chosen uniformly at random).
Claim 6, as analyzed with respect to the limitations as discussed in claim 1. Jayasooriya discloses an apparatus (Abstract, source node) comprising:
at least one processor (Section II, the source node samples a degree from a predetermined degree distribution, chooses d distinct input packets and generates a batch of M coded packets using random linear encoding, thus a processor and memory); and
a non-transitory computer readable storage medium, coupled to the at least one processor, storing programming for execution by the at least one processor, the programming including instructions to cause the apparatus to perform operations (Section Ill, the encoder at the source node divides the data stream into windows, encodes each block and moves the window forwards input packets, thus a processor and memory).
Claim 7, as analyzed with respect to the limitations as discussed in claim 2.
Claim 8, as analyzed with respect to the limitations as discussed in claim 3.
Claim 9, as analyzed with respect to the limitations as discussed in claim 4.
Claim 10, as analyzed with respect to the limitations as discussed in claim 5.
Claim 11, as analyzed with respect to the limitations as discussed in claim 1.
Claim 12, as analyzed with respect to the limitations as discussed in claim 2.
Claim 13, as analyzed with respect to the limitations as discussed in claim 3.
Claim 14, as analyzed with respect to the limitations as discussed in claim 4.
Claim 15, as analyzed with respect to the limitations as discussed in claim 5.
Claim 16, as analyzed with respect to the limitations as discussed in claim 6.
Claim 17, as analyzed with respect to the limitations as discussed in claim 2.
Claim 18, as analyzed with respect to the limitations as discussed in claim 3.
Claim 19, as analyzed with respect to the limitations as discussed in claim 4.
Claim 20, as analyzed with respect to the limitations as discussed in claim 5.
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. US 20190312676 A1 - The disclosure relates to a communication method and system for converging a 5th-Generation (5G) communication system for supporting higher data rates beyond a 4th-Generation (4G) system with a technology for Internet of Things (IoT). The disclosure may be applied to intelligent services based on the 5G communication technology and the IoT-related technology, such as smart home, smart building, smart city, smart car, connected car, health care, digital education, smart retail, security and safety services. The disclosure relates to encoding and decoding by using a polar code in a wireless communication system, and an operation method of a transmission-end apparatus includes determining segmentation and the number of segments, based on parameters associated with encoding of information bits, encoding the information bits according to the number of check bits, and transmitting the encoded information bits to a reception-end apparatus..
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Mehmood B. Khan whose telephone number is (571)272-9277. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9:30 am-6:30 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, Asad Nawaz can be reached at (571) 272-3988. 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.
/Mehmood B. Khan/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2463
MEHMOOD B. KHAN
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 2463
