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 view of the Pre-Brief Appeal filed on 10/31/2025, PROSECUTION IS HEREBY REOPENED. A new ground of rejection is set forth below
To avoid abandonment of the application, appellant must exercise one of the following two options:
(1) file a reply under 37 CFR 1.111 (if this Office action is non-final) or a reply under 37 CFR 1.113 (if this Office action is final); or,
(2) initiate a new appeal by filing a notice of appeal under 37 CFR 41.31 followed by an appeal brief under 37 CFR 41.37. The previously paid notice of appeal fee and appeal brief fee can be applied to the new appeal. If, however, the appeal fees set forth in 37 CFR 41.20 have been increased since they were previously paid, then appellant must pay the difference between the increased fees and the amount previously paid.
A Supervisory Patent Examiner (SPE) has approved of reopening prosecution by signing below:
Response to Remarks
This communication is considered fully responsive to the “ Pre-Appeal Brief Conference Request” on 10/31/2025.
Claims 1-4, 6-9, 15-18, 20-27 are pending and are examined in this office action.
Claims 1, 15, 21 have been amended.
No new claim has been added and claims 5, 10-14, 19, have been previously cancelled.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments, filled on 10/31/2025, with respect to claim(s) have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument. See RYU et al. (US 20200358500 A1; hereinafter as “RYU”) and further in view of CHOO et al. (US 20210058862 A1; hereinafter as “CHOO) and further in view of Hu3133 et al. (US 20200383133 A1; hereinafter as “Hu3133).
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 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.
Claims 1-3, 6-9, 15-17, 20-23, 25-27 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over MAAREF et al. (US 20150230224 A1; hereinafter as “MAAREF”) i in view of RYU et al. (US 20200358500 A1; hereinafter as “RYU”) and further in view of CHOO et al. (US 20210058862 A1; hereinafter as “CHOO) and further in view of Hu3133 et al. (US 20200383133 A1; hereinafter as “Hu3133)
With respect to independent claims:
Regarding claim 1, MAAREF teaches a method (method: [abstract], Fig. 1A-1B: “cooperative device meshes may be referred to as virtual multipoint transceivers and may be dynamically configured based on network conditions such as resource availability, UE cooperation strategies, channel conditions, and the like. Each virtual multipoint transceiver may include a target UE and a set of cooperating UEs, which help the target UE in uplink/downlink transmissions. ”: [0002]; [0018]) comprising:
Identifying, in a first period, downlink traffic with Quality of Service (QoS) priority for a first station (STA)) of a plurality of STAs connected to an Access Point (AP)
(Fig 1A: AP 102 (==an AP in claim ) connected with multiple UEs multiple UE 104a, UE 104b, 104C (==a plurality of STAs in claim) ; in Fig. 1A: Transmission Point/ AP/ Base Station 102 is connected with multiple UE 104a., 104b: [0018]; “base stations/eNodeBs/etc.) jointly communicating with UEs 104. Each virtual transmission point 102 may be selected based on quality of service (QoS) requirements, neighborhood relationships, and the like of a UE (e.g., TUE 104a). ”: [0018] For each virtual transmission point 102 is connect to a UE 104a based on QOS/quality requirement : [0018] last few lines; ): during a transmission time interval [==a first period], CC10 can be updated by the AP 102: “ cooperation candidate set (CCS) 110 may be updated every several hundred transmission time intervals (TTIs”: [0022], [abstract];see fig. 4; where multiple virtual UEs are ranked by Capacity of the UEs: [0034]-[0035]; (“the network controller may instruct the TUE to from a virtual multipoint transceiver based on channel quality measurements (e.g., a channel quality indicator (CQI) report) of the TUE”: [0027];
wherein each respective STA of the plurality of STAs comprises a respective physical device (see fig. 1A where STAs of multiple STAs are physical devices : “ Network 100 includes a plurality of radio nodes, such as transmission points 102 and UEs 104. ”: [0018]);
allocating a plurality of Resource Units (RU) to the plurality of STAs (Fig. 1A-1B: UE 104a and UE 104b) and the virtual STA (Fig. 1A-1B: Virtual multipoint transceiver 106) based on communications capabilities and traffic requests corresponding to the plurality of STAs comprising: (“the network controller (==AP in claim) may instruct the TUE to from a virtual multipoint transceiver based on channel quality measurements (e.g., a channel quality indicator (CQI) report) of the TUE”: [0027]; “the network (==AP in claim ) determines a virtual multipoint transceiver may be formed for a TUE. The network may determine a virtual multipoint transceiver may be formed based on receiving a CSR message from a TUE (e.g., the TUE may transmit the CSR message to a transmission point 102 serving the TUE). In other embodiments, the network may decide to form a virtual multipoint transceiver based channel quality measurements (e.g., a CQI report) of the TUE ),: “the network may consider energy saving considerations and turn-off (or deactivate) certain transmission points 102”: [0029]; connection in half duplex to certain UE and full duplex to another UE based on end-eo-end capacity metrics: [0032])
allocating a first RU of the plurality of RUs to the first STA for downlink (DL) communication and allocating second RU of the plurality of RUs to the virtual STA for uplink (UL) communication (a user equipment (UE) in a network may form a cooperative device mesh with other UEs to communicate cooperatively with one or more transmitters. These cooperative device meshes may be referred to as virtual multipoint transceivers and may be dynamically configured based on network conditions such as resource availability, UE cooperation strategies, channel conditions, and the like. Each virtual multipoint transceiver may include a target UE and a set of cooperating UEs, which help the target UE in uplink/downlink transmissions:” [0002]; “In a half-duplex mode, CUEs 104b may not receive data from the network” [NOTE: in half duplex mode, UE is configured to uplink transmission only] and in full duplex mode, data can be sent using downlink resource: [0020]; “Virtual multipoint transceiver 106 may be assigned a group ID by the network (e.g., by a network controller) for joint reception of transmissions. For example, in downlink transmissions a transmission point 102 associated with a particular virtual multipoint transceiver may multicast a transmission for TUE 104a to all the UEs in virtual multipoint transceiver 106 as identified by its network-assigned group ID. Packets from transmission point 102 to TUE 104a may be sent in two transmission phases. In the first transmission phase (known as the downlink multicast phase), transmission point 102 may multicast a transmission to virtual multipoint transceiver 106 (i.e., TUE 104a and CUEs 104b) across access links 112. In the second transmission phase (known as the data forwarding phase), CUEs 104b may forward receive portions of the multicast transmission to TUE 104a across D2D links 114. ”: [0020]).
While MAAREF teaches,” identifying, in a first time period, downlink traffic with Quality of Service (QoS) priority for a first station (STA) of a plurality of STAs connected to an Access Point (AP)”;
MAAREF does not explicitly discloses:
wherein the downlink traffic with QoS priority comprises higher priority data as compared to uplink traffic from at least a second STA of the plurality of STAs,
determining, based on network conditions, that the first STA is capable of full- duplex communication via a bidirectional resource unit (RU) on a single communication channel during the first time period;
in response to determining that the first STA is capable of full-duplex communication during the first time period, creating a virtual STA the first STA, wherein the virtual STA is not associated any other STA of the plurality of STAs;
reassigning the second RU from the virtual STA to the first STA as a bidirectional (BD) RU for full-duplex communications by the first STA, wherein both the first and second RUs are assigned to the first STA and are used concurrently by the first STA;
transmitting a generalized-trigger to the plurality of STAs to assign the plurality of RUs;
transmitting DL communications on DL RUs, including the first RU of the plurality RUs; and
receiving UL communications on UL RUs, including the second RU of the plurality of RUs.
RYU, in the same field of endeavor, discloses:
wherein the downlink traffic with QoS priority comprises higher priority data as compared to uplink traffic from at least a second STA of the plurality of STAs ( Different services eMBB, URLLC which meets different Quality of Service (QoS) requirement for UE/MTC: [0029]; “ one or more of the BS 702 or the UE 704 may include a look-up table configured to indicate whether the measured self-interference is acceptable for communication based on a reliability or quality of service requirement”: [0091]; UE is a physical device with processor, and other components : [0059]-[0061]);
reassigning the second RU from the virtual STA to the first STA as a bidirectional (BD) RU for full-duplex communications by the first STA, wherein both the first and second RUs are assigned to the first STA and are used concurrently by the first STA (whole network in virtual network with BS and UE : [0032]);
transmitting a generalized-trigger to the plurality of STAs to assign the plurality of RUs ( “ A scheduling entity (e.g., a BS) allocates resources for communication among some or all devices and equipment within its service area or cell”: [0042]);
transmitting DL communications on DL RUs, including the first RU of the plurality RUs; and receiving UL communications on UL RUs, including the second RU of the plurality of RUs (see fig. 9: 906 “ t block 906, the UE receives, via the first downlink beam, a second signal responsive to the request, the second signal configured to enable the UE to change from the first beam pair to a second beam pair and maintain full duplex communication with the BS, wherein the second beam pair includes one or more of a second uplink beam or a second downlink beam.”: [0111]).
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 the teaching of MAAREF to include the above recited limitations as taught by RYU. The suggestion/motivation would be to reducing self-interference at user equipment during full-duplex communication. (RYU; [0001).
The combination of MAAREF and RYU does not expressively disclose:
determining, based on network conditions, that the first STA is capable of full- duplex communication via a bidirectional resource unit (RU) on a single communication channel during the first time period ();
in response to determining that the first STA is capable of full-duplex communication during the first time period, creating a virtual STA the first STA, wherein the virtual STA is not associated any other STA of the plurality of STAs.
CHOO, in the same field of endeavor, discloses:
PNG
media_image1.png
421
534
media_image1.png
Greyscale
determining, based on network conditions, that the first STA is capable of full- duplex communication via a bidirectional resource unit (RU) on a single communication channel during the first time period (Fig. 1, Fig. 6Fig. 16 “ AP and the STA may repeatedly perform full-duplex communication”: [0122]; “ FIG. 6 illustrates an example process of performing full-duplex communication in a WLAN. FIG. 6A illustrates a BSS 200 that performs full-duplex communication in a WLAN. The BSS 200 includes a single AP 210 and ‘n’ number of STAs 220-1, 220-2, . . . , 220-n. The AP 210 is an AP capable of full-duplex communication (hereinafter referred to as an FD-capable AP). STA 1 220-1, STA 2 220-2, and STA n 220-n are STAs capable of full-duplex communication (hereinafter referred to as FD-capable STAs)”: [0059]; see fig. 9B “ FIG. 9A illustrates an example in which individual RUs are allocated for uplink and downlink. When an FD-capable AP performs full-duplex communication with any STA, the AP and the STA may use different RUs. FIG. 9B illustrates a case in which a pair of AP and STA uses a single common RU. When an FD-capable AP and an FD-capable STA perform full-duplex communication, the pair may use a common RU. The AP may deliver information regarding the RU through the reference frame (the trigger frame). FIG. 9B illustrates an example in which the AP and STA 1 use a common RU and the AP and STA n use a common RU.”: [0076]).
in response to determining that the first STA is capable of full-duplex communication during the first time period (see fig.9A-9B; AP and STA 1 use a common RU and the AP and STA n use a common RU.”: [0076]).
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 the teaching of MAAREF in view of RYU to include the above recited limitations as taught by CHOO. The suggestion/motivation would be to improve system throughput in dense environments with many APs and STAs. Also, a new power saving technology which is called TWT, target wake time, was employed for efficient communication in dense WLAN environment. (CHOO; [0004)).
The combination of MAAREF in view of RYU , CHOO does not expressly disclose:
creating a virtual STA the first STA, wherein the virtual STA is not associated any other STA of the plurality of STAs.
HU3133 , in the same field of endeavor, discloses:
creating a virtual STA the first STA, wherein the virtual STA is not associated any other STA of the plurality of STAs (create a virtual STA using resource unit (RUs) assigned to wireless STA: [0007]; [0017]-[0018] ; “ Embodiments of the present invention assign multiple resource units (RUs) to a single wireless station using an aggregated Multi-RU (“virtual resource unit” or “vRU”) that aggregates multiple RUs, and the parameters of the virtual RU can be calculated according to existing standards such the padding schemes and RUs (e.g., RU26, RU52, RU106, RU242, RU484, RU996, RU2x996) as defined in IEEE 802.11ax. The virtual RU parameters used for joint encoding can be directly calculated based on formulas described herein according to embodiments of the present invention, and according to values obtained from pre-defined tables.”; [0038] ‘” transmitting data to a wireless STA using a virtual RU assigned to the wireless STA ”: [0058]; “ transmitting data to a wireless station (STA) using a virtual resource unit (RU) assigned to the wireless STA, the method comprising: calculating parameters for transmitting the virtual RU according to a multi-RU scheduling, wherein said virtual RU comprises a plurality of RUs of the multi-RU scheduling;”: claim 1] ; NOTE: virtual STA is ONLY for one/first STA and NOT associated with any other STA or wireless device ).
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 the teaching of MAAREF in view of RYU, CHOO to include the above recited limitations as taught by HU3133 . The suggestion/motivation would be to improve system throughput for using multiple resource units with a single wireless station within a wireless communication network (HU3133; [0002)).
Regarding claim 2, the combination of MAAREF, RYU, CHOO, HU3133 teaches claim 1 as shown above. Furthermore, MAAREF teaches, the method of claim 1, wherein the UL RUs of the plurality of RUs are delayed by a predefined amount of time relative to the DL RUs of the plurality of RUs (predefined duration : [0065]).
Regarding claim 3, the combination of MAAREF, RYU, CHOO, HU3133 teaches claim 1 as shown above. Furthermore, MAAREF teaches, the method of claim 1, further comprising: performing self-interference cancellation on a first UL communication received via the BD RU based on a first DL message transmitted to the first STA on the BD RU (0032]-[0033]).
Regarding claim 6, the combination of MAAREF, RYU, CHOO, HU3133 teaches claim 1 as shown above. Furthermore, MAAREF teaches , the method of claim 1, wherein allocating the plurality of RUs to the plurality STAs based on the communications capabilities and traffic requests further comprises: allocating a second RU of the plurality of RUs to a second STA of the plurality of connected STAs for a half-duplex communication with the second STA (“CUEs 104b may operate in a half-duplex mode or a full-duplex mode. In a half-duplex mode, CUEs 104b may not receive data from the network and simultaneously forward data to TUE 104a in the same time and frequency resources. “: [0020]).
Regarding claim 7, the combination of MAAREF, RYU, CHOO, HU3133 teaches claim 1 as shown above. Furthermore, MAAREF teaches , The method of claim 1, wherein allocating the plurality of RUs to the plurality STAs based on the communications capabilities and traffic requests further comprises: allocating a second RU and a third RU of the plurality of RUs to a second STA of the plurality of connected STAs, wherein the second RU and third RU are in different frequency bands, for a dual-half-duplex communication with the second STA (some of the UEs operates in half duplex mode: [0031]).
Regarding claim 8, the combination of MAAREF, RYU, CHOO, HU3133 teaches claim 1 as shown above. Furthermore, MAAREF teaches , the method of claim 1, further comprising: between transmitting the generalized-trigger and transmitting the DL communications, receiving a Clear to Transmit Signal from the plurality of STAs (AP obtains the use permission of the channel in an RTS/CTS (get clear to transmit signal from UEs: [0042]; [0047-[0048).
Regarding claim 9, the combination of MAAREF, RYU, CHOO, HU3133 teaches claim 1 as shown above. Furthermore, MAAREF teaches , the method of claim 1, further comprising: receiving acknowledgement messages from the plurality of STAs to which DL communications were transmitted (getting acknowledgement from STAs: [0022], [0040]).
Regarding claims 15, 21, the claim is interpreted and rejected for the same reason as set forth in claim 1.
Regarding claim 16, the claim is interpreted and rejected for the same reason as set forth in claim 2.
Regarding claim 17, the claim is interpreted and rejected for the same reason as set forth in claim 3.
Regarding claim 18, the claim is interpreted and rejected for the same reason as set forth in claim 4.
Regarding claim 20, the claim is interpreted and rejected for the same reason as set forth in claim 7.
Regarding claim 22, the claim is interpreted and rejected for the same reason as set forth in claim 2.
Regarding claim 23, the claim is interpreted and rejected for the same reason as set forth in claim 3.
Regarding claim 24, the claim is interpreted and rejected for the same reason as set forth in claim 4.
Regarding claim 20, the claim is interpreted and rejected for the same reason as set forth in claim 7.
Regarding claim 25, the claim is interpreted and rejected for the same reason as set forth in claim 6.
Regarding claim 26, the claim is interpreted and rejected for the same reason as set forth in claim 7.
Regarding claim 27, the claim is interpreted and rejected for the same reason as set forth in claim 8.
Claims 4, 18, 24 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over MAAREF, RYU, CHOO, HU3133 and further in view of MA et al. (US 3 A1; hereinafter as “MA”).
Regarding claim 4, the combination of MAAREF, RYU, CHOO, HU3133 teaches claim 1 as shown above. The combination does not explicitly discloses: the method of claim 1, wherein allocating the plurality of RUs further comprises: identifying an interference path between the first STA and a second STA of the plurality STAs via a sounding feedback from the first STA identifying the second STA; and allocating the plurality of RUs to the plurality STAs such that the BD RU allocated to the first STA and a second BD RU allocated to the second STA are in non-neighboring frequency bands.
MA , in the same field of endeavor, discloses: the method of claim 1, wherein allocating the plurality of RUs further comprises: identifying an interference path between the first STA and a second STA of the plurality STAs via a sounding feedback from the first STA identifying the second STA; and allocating the plurality of RUs to the plurality STAs such that the BD RU allocated to the first STA and a second BD RU allocated to the second STA are in non-neighboring frequency bands (some examples, TTI boundary and timing alignment of different numerology schemes used in neighboring TDD sub-bands can be applied, to mitigate against downlink-uplink cross interference between the sub-bands for example. In this regard, FIG. 4 provides an example where TTI boundary and timing alignment is achieved by re-ordering or re-arranging OFDM symbols in TTI(s). The example in FIG. 4 relates to a DL channel with different sub-bands split into symbols with different numerologies. In FIG. 4, DL-only frame structures are provided to support DL peak data rate. 15 kHz and 30 kHz subcarrier spacing options, each with 7(3, 4) symbols per TTI and basic time unit, are employed, respectively, in two sub-bands of a single carrier frequency bandwidth. Symbol details for 15 kHz are: S2 (66.67+5.2) us, S1 (66.67+4.17) us; Symbol details for 30 kHz are: S2 (33.33+2.6) us, S1 (33.33+2.08)us. TTI boundary and timing alignment details between the two sub-bands are: 1) The timing alignment is with the smaller subcarrier spacing 15 kHz TTI. Note that 1 TTI of 15 kHz is equivalent to 2 TTIs of 30 kHz by re-ordering the symbols. 2) There is a switching gap for DL/UL guard period (GP) and alignment. 3) There is UL timing alignment for acknowledgement/negative acknowledgement (ACK/NACK), channel quality indicator (CQI) feedback and/or sound reference signals (SRS).: [0119]).
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 the teaching of MAAREF, RYU, CHOO, HU3133 to include the above recited limitations as taught by MA. The suggestion/motivation to do so would have been to avoid or reduce reference signal collision: (MA; [0160]).
Regarding claim 18, the claim is interpreted and rejected for the same reason as set forth in claim 4.
Regarding claim 24, the claim is interpreted and rejected for the same reason as set forth in claim 4.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to M MOSTAZIR RAHMAN whose telephone number is (571)272-4785. The examiner can normally be reached 8:30am-5:00pm PST.
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 at 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.
/M Mostazir Rahman/Examiner, Art Unit 2411
/DERRICK W FERRIS/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2411
