DETAILED ACTION
1. The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . This action is responsive to amendments filed 06/29/2026. Claims 11-20 are previously cancelled. Claims 1 and 7 are currently amended. Claims 1-10 and 21 are pending for examination.
Response to Arguments
2. Applicant’s arguments filed on 06/29/2026 with respect to claims 1 and 7 have been considered but are moot in view of the new ground of rejection necessitated by applicant’s amendment.
Examiner’s statements:
Examiner has mentioned that the claim limitations of claims 1 and 7 with “wherein the third data frame” cause is with the phrase “decodable” to indicate “intended use” claim limitations. Thus, the examiner stated that the applicant should overcome “intended use” claim limitations.
Double Patenting
3. The nonstatutory double patenting rejection is based on a judicially created doctrine grounded in public policy (a policy reflected in the statute) so as to prevent the unjustified or improper timewise extension of the “right to exclude” granted by a patent and to prevent possible harassment by multiple assignees. A nonstatutory double patenting rejection is appropriate where the claims at issue are not identical, but at least one examined application claim is not patentably distinct from the reference claim(s) because the examined application claim is either anticipated by, or would have been obvious over, the reference claim(s). See, e.g., In re Berg, 140 F.3d 1428, 46 USPQ2d 1226 (Fed. Cir. 1998); In re Goodman, 11 F.3d 1046, 29 USPQ2d 2010 (Fed. Cir. 1993); In re Longi, 759 F.2d 887, 225 USPQ 645 (Fed. Cir. 1985); In re Van Ornum, 686 F.2d 937, 214 USPQ 761 (CCPA 1982); In re Vogel, 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); and In re Thorington, 418 F.2d 528, 163 USPQ 644 (CCPA 1969).
A timely filed terminal disclaimer in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(c) or 1.321(d) may be used to overcome an actual or provisional rejection based on a nonstatutory double patenting ground provided the reference application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with this application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement. A terminal disclaimer must be signed in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(b).
The USPTO internet Web site contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit http://www.uspto.gov/forms/. The filing date of the application will determine what form should be used. A web-based eTerminal Disclaimer may be filled out completely online using web-screens. An eTerminal Disclaimer that meets all requirements is auto-processed and approved immediately upon submission. For more information about eTerminal Disclaimers, refer to http://www.uspto.gov/patents/process/file/efs/guidance/eTD-info-I.jsp.
4. Claims 1-10 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory obviousness-type double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-4, 9-11 of application no. 17/237421, hereinafter referred to as “421” in view of Shapira (US 2007/0155353 A1), in view of Yang (US 2022/0368481 A1), in view of Baek (US 2022/0248375 A1), in view of Moro (US 2020/0169323 A1), in view of Chu (US 2020/0107393 A1) and in view of Callard (US 2014/0140451 A1), in view of Hao (US 2021/0297121 A1) and in view of Zhang (US 2020/0136753 A1).
Instant application
Application 17/237421
1.
A method of wireless data communication, the method comprising:
obtaining, by a data link layer, a first data frame from a network layer, the first data frame intended for wireless transmission over a first link;
obtaining, by the data link layer, a second data frame from the network layer, the second data frame intended for wireless transmission over a second link;
coding, at the data link layer, the first data frame together with the second data frame to generate a third data frame;
wherein the third data frame is decodable to restore the first data frame and the second data frame;
providing the third data frame for wireless transmission over the first link and the second link.
2. further comprising:
encoding a first signal with the third data frame using a first frequency segment;
encoding a second signal with the first data frame using a second frequency segment; encoding a third signal with the second data frame using a third frequency segment; and
providing the second signal and the third signal for wireless transmission.
3. wherein the first frequency segment is included in a first frequency band configured to support a first wireless network, the second frequency segment is included in a second frequency band configured to support a second wireless network, and the third frequency segment is included in a third frequency band configured to support a third wireless network.
1.
5. Claims 1 and 7 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory obviousness-type double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1, 9 and 21 of application no. 17/237421, hereinafter referred to as “421” in view of Shapira (US 2007/0155353 A1).
Regarding Claims 1 and 7, Claim 1, 9 and 21 of the “17/237421” does not recite a method of wireless data communication, the method comprising: obtaining, by a data link layer, a first data frame from a network layer, the first data frame intended for wireless transmission over a first link, obtaining, by the data link layer, a second data frame from the network layer, the second data frame intended for wireless transmission over a second link.
However, in an analogous art, Shapira teaches Obtaining (receive), by a data link layer, a first data frame from a network layer ([0039], Fig.1, MAC 150 of data link layer, receives user data/frames {i.e. 1st} from network layers.), the first data frame intended for wireless transmission over a first link {[0039], Fig.1, MAC 150 of data link layer, receives user data/frames from network layers, e.g., data intended for {wireless transmission via links—see [0037]} stations 120 and 130.} (Hence 1st data frame intended for wireless transmission over 1st link to STA 120.),
Obtaining(receive), by the data link layer, a second data frame from the network layer ([0039], Fig.1, MAC 150 of data link layer, receives user data/frames {i.e.2nd } from network layers.), the second data frame intended for wireless transmission over a second link {[0039], Fig.1, MAC 150 of data link layer, receives user data/frames from network layers, e.g., data intended for {wireless transmission via links—see [0037]} stations 120 and 130.} (Hence 2nd data frame intended for wireless transmission over 2nd link to STA 130.);
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to take the teaching of Shapira and apply them in the claim 1, 9 and 21 of the “17/237421” to improve security of the downlink transmission (Shapira; [0009]).
6. Claims 1 and 7 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory obviousness-type double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1, 9 and 21 of application no. 17/237421, hereinafter referred to as “421” in view of Yang (US 2022/0368481 A1).
Regarding Claims 1 and 7, Claim 1, 9 and 21 of the “17/237421” does not recite coding, at the data link layer, the first data frame together with the second data frame to generate a third data frame; and providing the third data frame for wireless transmission over the first link and the second link.
However, in an analogous art, Yang teaches Coding (encrypt), at the data link (MAC) layer ([0028]), the first data frame (each MPDU—i.e. 1st) together with the second data frame (each MPDU—i.e. 2nd) to generate a third data frame (encrypted MPDU-i.e. 3rd) (Fig. 10; [0050], transmitter encrypts each MPDU {MAC protocol data unit} {plural—see [0049]}, to produce an encrypted MPDU.) (Hence it is obvious, coding at MAC layer of the transmitter, 1st data frame/MPDU together with 2nd data frame/MPDU to generate a 3rd data frame/MPDU.); and
providing the third data frame (encrypted MPDU-i.e. 3rd) for wireless transmission over the first link and the second link ([0050], the transmitter determines different links {i.e. 1st and 2nd} in a group of aggregated 802.11 links to transmit the produced MPDU or encrypted MPDU.) (Hence the transmitter, provides the 3rd data frame/MPDU that is encrypted for wireless transmission over the 1st and 2nd link.).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to take the teaching of Yang and apply them in the claim 1, 9 and 21 of the “17/237421” to provide higher throughputs, lower latency and jitters, and reduced packet loss rate (Yang; [0026]).
7. Claims 1 and 7 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory obviousness-type double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1, 9 and 21 of application no. 17/237421, hereinafter referred to as “421” in view of Baek (US 2022/0248375 A1).
Regarding Claims 1 and 7, Claim 1, 9 and 21 of the “17/237421” does not recite wherein the third data frame is decodable to restore the first data frame and the second data frame.
However, in an analogous art, Baek teaches wherein the third data frame (codeword) is decodable to restore the first data frame (1st CB) and the second data frame (2nd CB)([0468], The codeword may be restored to original information blocks {CBs (i.e. 1st and 2nd) are concatenated to generate a codeword—see [0239]} through decoding.)(Hence the 3rd data/codeword is decodable to restore the 1st data/CB and 2nd data/CB.); and
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to take the teaching of Baek and apply them in the claim 1, 9 and 21 of the “17/237421” to provide codeword is generated via coding 1st CB with 2nd CB, wherein the codeword is decodable to restore the 1st and 2nd CB(Baek; [0239]; [0468]).
8. Claims 2 and 8 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory obviousness-type double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1, 9 and 21 of application no. 17/237421, hereinafter referred to as “421” in view of Callard (US 2014/0140451 A1).
Regarding Claims 2 and 8, Claim 1, 9 and 21 of the “17/237421” does not recite further comprising: encoding a first signal with the third data frame using a first frequency segment; encoding a second signal with the first data frame using a second frequency segment; encoding a third signal with the second data frame using a third frequency segment;
However, in an analogous art, Callard teaches encoding a first signal (1st encoded packet) with the third data frame(data-1) using a first frequency segment (air channels-i.e. 1st) ([0028]);
encoding a second signal (3rd encoded packet) with the first data frame(data-2) using a second frequency segment (air channels-i.e. 3rd) ([0028]);
encoding a third signal (4th encoded packet) with the second data frame(data-3) using a third frequency segment (air channels-i.e. 3rd) ([0028]); and
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to take the teaching of Callard and apply them in the claim 1, 9 and 21 of the “17/237421” to provide interference cancellation techniques include any scheme that allows for improved reception (Callard; [0026])
9. Claims 2-5, 8 and 9 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory obviousness-type double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1, 9 and 21 of application no. 17/237421, hereinafter referred to as “421” in view of Chu (US 2020/0107393 A1).
Regarding Claims 2 and 8, Claim 1, 9 and 21 of the “17/237421” does not recite providing the third signal for wireless transmission.
However, in an analogous art, Chu teaches providing the third signal (3rd PPDU) for wireless ([0002]) transmission ([0056], 300 {AP 114/300-[0055]} to generate and transmit multiple PPDUs{i.e. 2nd & 3rd} simultaneously.).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to take the teaching of Chu and apply them in the claim 1, 9 and 21 of the “17/237421” to provide physical layer (PHY) support for data transmission and reception over multiple communication channels, to improve throughput (Chu; [0002]; [0003]).
Regarding Claim 3, Claim 1, 9 and 21 of the “17/237421” does not recite the third frequency segment is included in a third frequency band configured to support a third wireless network.
However, in an analogous art, Chu teaches the third frequency segment is included in a third frequency band (band-i.e. 6 GHz) ([0052], corresponding to multi-channel {frequency bands} operation over multiple communication channel segments.) configured to support a third wireless network ( [0003], 6 GHz band supports WLANs {i.e. 3rd wireless network}.).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to take the teaching of Chu and apply them in the claim 1, 9 and 21 of the “17/237421” to provide physical layer (PHY) support for data transmission and reception over multiple communication channels, to improve throughput (Chu; [0002]; [0003]).
Regarding Claim 4, Claim 1, 9 and 21 of the “17/237421” does not recite the third frequency band are one of: a 2.4 GHz band, a 5 GHz band, and a 6 GHz band.
However, in an analogous art, Chu teaches the third frequency band are one of: a 2.4 GHz band, a 5 GHz band, and a 6 GHz band ([0052], 1st, 2nd and 3rd bands are 2.4 GHz band, 5 GHz band, and 6 GHz band, respectively.).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to take the teaching of Chu and apply them in the claim 1, 9 and 21 of the “17/237421” to provide physical layer (PHY) support for data transmission and reception over multiple communication channels, to improve throughput (Chu; [0002]; [0003]).
Regarding Claims 5 and 9, Claim 1, 9 and 21 of the “17/237421” does not recite wherein data of the first data frame originates at a first device and data of the second data frame originates at a second device, the third data frame is provided for wireless transmission to both the first device and the second device
However, in an analogous art, Chu teaches wherein data of the first data frame (1st frame) originates at a first device (154-1) and data of the second data frame (2nd frame) originates at a second device (154-2) ([0024], AP 114 is configured to process received {from clients 154-1 &154-2-see [0043]} data units {1st & 2nd frame-[0060]}. ),
the third data frame (1st baseband signal/1st PPDU) is provided for wireless transmission to both the first device (154-1) and the second device (154-2) ([0050], AP 114/300 is configured to transmit {wirelessly-[0002]} a first signal (e.g., 1st PPDU/1st baseband signal). Wherein [0043], PPDU is transmitted to client stations 154{i.e. 154-1 & 154-2}.).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to take the teaching of Chu and apply them in the claim 1, 9 and 21 of the “17/237421” to provide physical layer (PHY) support for data transmission and reception over multiple communication channels, to improve throughput (Chu; [0002]; [0003]).
10. Claims 5 and 9 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory obviousness-type double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1, 9 and 21 of application no. 17/237421, hereinafter referred to as “421” in view of Hao (US 2021/0297121 A1).
Regarding Claims 5 and 9, Claim 1, 9 and 21 of the “17/237421” does not recite the third data frame includes an indication that the third data frame is intended for the first device and the second device.
However, in an analogous art, Hao teaches the third data frame (410) includes an indication that the third data frame is intended for the first device (UE 115-a) and the second device (UE 115-b) ([0081]; wherein 410 includes an indication that the 410 is intended for the UEs.), and
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to take the teaching of Hao and apply them in the claim 1, 9 and 21 of the “17/237421” to support efficient techniques for indicating the categorization of interference layers to a UE. Accordingly, the UE may be able to equalize signals received from a base station (e.g., filter out interference signals) (Hao; [0058]).
11. Claims 6 and 10 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory obviousness-type double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1, 9 and 21 of application no. 17/237421, hereinafter referred to as “421” in view of Zhang (US 2020/0136753 A1).
Regarding Claims 6 and 10, Claim 1, 9 and 21 of the “17/237421” does not recite wherein a preamble of the third data frame indicates that the third data frame is a coded data frame that includes two data frames.
However, in an analogous art, Zhang teaches wherein a preamble of the third data frame (PHY data unit) indicates that the third data frame is a coded data frame that includes two data frames (PSDUs)(Abstract).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to take the teaching of Zhang and apply them in the claim 1, 9 and 21 of the “17/237421” for improving throughput in communication systems(Zhang; [0005]).
12. Claim 21 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory obviousness-type double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1, 9 and 21 of application no. 17/237421, hereinafter referred to as “421” in view of Moro (US 2020/0169323 A1).
Regarding Claim 21, Claim 1, 9 and 21 of the “17/237421” does not recite the first data frame corresponding to a first data packet, the second data frame corresponding to a second data packet.
However, in an analogous art, Moro teaches the first data frame corresponding to a first data packet, the second data frame corresponding to a second data packet ( [0030] & [0038], data frames{1st and 2nd} in the form of packets {1st and 2nd}.).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to take the teaching of Moro and apply them in the claim 1, 9 and 21 of the “17/237421” to provide quality Internet service to unconnected residences around the globe, the infrastructure required to make a high capacity practical necessitates major advancements in terrestrial, airborne, and space-borne telecommunications technologies (Moro; [0002]).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
13. 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 set forth in Graham v. John Deere Co., 383 U.S. 1, 148 USPQ 459 (1966), that are applied 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.
14. Claims 1 and 7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Shapira (US 2007/0155353 A1) in view of Yang (US 2022/0368481 A1), further in view of Baek (US 2022/0248375 A1).
Regarding claims 1 and 7, Shapira teaches a method of wireless data communication, the method comprising:
Obtaining (receive), by a data link layer, a first data frame from a network layer ([0039], Fig.1, MAC 150 of data link layer, receives user data/frames {i.e. 1st} from network layers.), the first data frame intended for wireless transmission over a first link {[0039], Fig.1, MAC 150 of data link layer, receives user data/frames from network layers, e.g., data intended for {wireless transmission via links—see [0037]} stations 120 and 130.} (Hence 1st data frame intended for wireless transmission over 1st link to STA 120.),
Obtaining(receive), by the data link layer, a second data frame from the network layer ([0039], Fig.1, MAC 150 of data link layer, receives user data/frames {i.e.2nd } from network layers.), the second data frame intended for wireless transmission over a second link {[0039], Fig.1, MAC 150 of data link layer, receives user data/frames from network layers, e.g., data intended for {wireless transmission via links—see [0037]} stations 120 and 130.} (Hence 2nd data frame intended for wireless transmission over 2nd link to STA 130.);
Shapira does not teach coding, at the data link layer, the first data frame together with the second data frame to generate a third data frame; and providing the third data frame for wireless transmission over the first link and the second link.
However, in an analogous art, Yang teaches
Coding (encrypt), at the data link (MAC) layer ([0028]), the first data frame (each MPDU—i.e. 1st) together with the second data frame (each MPDU—i.e. 2nd) to generate a third data frame (encrypted MPDU-i.e. 3rd) (Fig. 10; [0050], transmitter encrypts each MPDU {MAC protocol data unit} {plural—see [0049]}, to produce an encrypted MPDU.) (Hence it is obvious, coding at MAC layer of the transmitter, 1st data frame/MPDU together with 2nd data frame/MPDU to generate a 3rd data frame/MPDU.); and
providing the third data frame (encrypted MPDU-i.e. 3rd) for wireless transmission over the first link and the second link ([0050], the transmitter determines different links {i.e. 1st and 2nd} in a group of aggregated 802.11 links to transmit the produced MPDU or encrypted MPDU.) (Hence the transmitter, provides the 3rd data frame/MPDU that is encrypted for wireless transmission over the 1st and 2nd link.).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claim invention to take the teaching of Yang and apply them on the teaching of Shapira to provide higher throughputs, lower latency and jitters, and reduced packet loss rate (Yang; [0026]).
Shapira- Yang do not teach wherein the third data frame is decodable to restore the first data frame and the second data frame.
However, in an analogous art, Baek teaches coding(encode), at the data link layer (MAC layer), the first data frame (1st CB) together with the second data frame (2nd CB) to generate a third data frame (codeword) ( [0239], transmitting side encodes each CB of the TB (i.e. MAC PDU--obvious at MAC layer). The CBs {i.e. 1st and 2nd} are concatenated to generate a codeword for transmission.)(Hence, coding at MAC layer of transmitting side, 1st data/CB together with 2nd data/CB to generate a 3rd data/codeword.), wherein the third data frame (codeword) is decodable to restore the first data frame (1st CB) and the second data frame (2nd CB)([0468], The codeword may be restored to original information blocks {CBs (i.e. 1st and 2nd) are concatenated to generate a codeword—see [0239]} through decoding.)(Hence the 3rd data/codeword is decodable to restore the 1st data/CB and 2nd data/CB.);
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claim invention to take the teaching of Baek and apply them on the teaching of Shapira- Yang to provide codeword is generated via coding 1st CB with 2nd CB, wherein the codeword is decodable to restore the 1st and 2nd CB(Baek; [0239]; [0468]).
Specifically, for claim 7, Yang teaches a device (transmitting STA 210--Fig. 2A; [0033]) comprising:
Hardware (1604-Fig. 16) configured to perform operations ([0063]), including for a data link layer (Mac Layer—[0050]; Fig. 2B), the operations including:
front-end circuitry (1614-Fig. 16; [0050]) coupled to the hardware (1604) (see Fig. 16) and configured to adapt the third data frame (encrypted MPDU—[0050]) for wireless transmission ([0050];).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claim invention to take the teaching of Yang and apply them on the teaching of Shapira- Baek to provide higher throughputs, lower latency and jitters, and reduced packet loss rate (Yang; [0026]).
15. Claims 2-4, 8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Shapira (US 2007/0155353 A1) in view of Yang (US 2022/0368481 A1), in view of Baek (US 2022/0248375 A1), in view of Chu (US 2020/0107393 A1), further in view of Callard (US 2014/0140451 A1).
Regarding claim 2 and 8, Shapira – Yang- Baek do not teach providing the second signal and the third signal for wireless transmission.
However, in an analogous art, Chu teaches providing the second signal (2nd PPDU) and the third signal (3rd PPDU) for wireless ([0002]) transmission ([0056], 300 {AP 114/300-[0055]} to generate and transmit multiple PPDUs{i.e. 2nd & 3rd} simultaneously.).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claim invention to take the teaching of Chu and apply them on the teaching of Shapira – Yang- Baek to provide physical layer (PHY) support for data transmission and reception over multiple communication channels, to improve throughput (Chu; [0002]; [0003]).
Shapira – Yang - Baek -Chu does not teach encoding a first signal with the third data frame using a first frequency segment; encoding a second signal with the first data frame using a second frequency segment; encoding a third signal with the second data frame using a third frequency segment; and
However, in an analogous art, Callard teaches
encoding a first signal (1st encoded packet) with the third data frame(data-1) using a first frequency segment (air channels-i.e. 1st) ([0028]);
encoding a second signal (3rd encoded packet) with the first data frame(data-2) using a second frequency segment (air channels-i.e. 2nd) ([0028]);
encoding a third signal (4th encoded packet) with the second data frame(data-3) using a third frequency segment (air channels-i.e. 3rd) ([0028]); and
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claim invention to take the teaching of Callard and apply them on the teaching of Shapira – Yang - Baek -Chu to provide interference cancellation techniques include any scheme that allows for improved reception (Callard; [0026])
Regarding claim 3, Shapira – Yang - Baek -Callard does not teach wherein the first frequency segment is included in a first frequency band configured to support a first wireless network, the second frequency segment is included in a second frequency band configured to support a second wireless network, and the third frequency segment is included in a third frequency band configured to support a third wireless network.
However, in an analogous art, Chu teaches wherein the first frequency segment is included in a first frequency band (band-i.e. 2.4 GHz) ([0052], corresponding to multi-channel{ frequency bands} operation over multiple communication channel segments.) configured to support a first wireless network ( [0003], 2.4 GHz band supports WLANs {i.e. 1st wireless network}.), the second frequency segment is included in a second frequency band (band-i.e. 5 GHz) ([0052], corresponding to multi-channel{ frequency bands} operation over multiple communication channel segments.) configured to support a second wireless network ( [0003], 5 GHz band supports WLANs {i.e. 2nd wireless network}.), and the third frequency segment is included in a third frequency band (band-i.e. 6 GHz) ([0052], corresponding to multi-channel{ frequency bands} operation over multiple communication channel segments.) configured to support a third wireless network ( [0003], 6 GHz band supports WLANs {i.e. 3rd wireless network}.).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claim invention to take the teaching of Chu and apply them on the teaching of Shapira – Yang - Baek -Callard to provide physical layer (PHY) support for data transmission and reception over multiple communication channels, to improve throughput (Chu; [0002]; [0003]).
Regarding claim 4, Shapira – Yang - Baek -Callard does not teach wherein the first frequency band, the second frequency band, and the third frequency band are defined under an Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers (IEEE) 802.11 protocol and each of the first frequency band, the second frequency band, and the third frequency band are one of: a 2.4 GHz o band, a 5 GHz band, and a 6 GHz band.
However, in an analogous art, Chu teaches wherein the first frequency band (band-i.e. 2.4 GHz), the second frequency band(band-i.e. 5 GHz), and the third frequency band(band-i.e. 6 GHz) are defined under an Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers (IEEE) 802.11 protocol([0052]; [0004]; 2.4 GHz, 5 GHz and 6 GHz bands are defined under 802.11 protocol.) and each of the first frequency band, the second frequency band, and the third frequency band are one of: a 2.4 GHz band, a 5 GHz band, and a 6 GHz band([0052], 1st, 2nd and 3rd bands are 2.4 GHz band, 5 GHz band, and 6 GHz band, respectively.).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claim invention to take the teaching of Chu and apply them on the teaching of Shapira – Yang - Baek -Callard to provide physical layer (PHY) support for data transmission and reception over multiple communication channels, to improve throughput (Chu; [0002]; [0003]).
16. Claims 5 and 9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Shapira (US 2007/0155353 A1) in view of Yang (US 2022/0368481 A1), in view of Baek (US 2022/0248375 A1), in view of Chu (US 2020/0107393 A1), further in view of Hao (US 2021/0297121 A1).
Regarding claims 5 and 9, Shapira – Yang- Baek does not teach wherein data of the first data frame originates at a first device and data of the second data frame originates at a second device, the first signal is provided for wireless transmission to both the first device and the second device.
However, in an analogous art, Chu teaches wherein data of the first data frame (1st frame) originates at a first device (154-1) and data of the second data frame (2nd frame) originates at a second device (154-2) ([0024], AP 114 is configured to process received {from clients 154-1 &154-2-see [0043]} data units {1st & 2nd frame-[0060]}. ),
the third data frame (1st baseband signal/1st PPDU) is provided for wireless transmission to both the first device (154-1) and the second device (154-2) ([0050], AP 114/300 is configured to transmit {wirelessly-[0002]} a first signal (e.g., 1st PPDU/1st baseband signal). Wherein [0043], PPDU is transmitted to client stations 154{i.e. 154-1 & 154-2}.).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claim invention to take the teaching of Chu and apply them on the teaching of Shapira – Yang- Baek to provide physical layer (PHY) support for data transmission and reception over multiple communication channels, to improve throughput (Chu; [0002]; [0003]).
Shapira – Yang - Baek -Chu does not teach the third data frame includes an indication that the third data frame is intended for the first device and the second device
However, in an analogous art, Hao teaches the third data frame (410) includes an indication that the third data frame is intended for the first device (UE 115-a) and the second device (UE 115-b) ([0081]; wherein 410 includes an indication that the 410 is intended for the UEs.), and
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claim invention to take the teaching of Hao and apply them on the teaching of Shapira – Yang - Baek -Chu to support efficient techniques for indicating the categorization of interference layers to a UE. Accordingly, the UE may be able to equalize signals received from a base station (e.g., filter out interference signals) (Hao; [0058]).
17. Claims 6 and 10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Shapira (US 2007/0155353 A1) in view of Yang (US 2022/0368481 A1), in view of Baek (US 2022/0248375 A1), further in view of Zhang (US 2020/0136753 A1).
Regarding claims 6 and 10, Shapira – Yang – Baek- Chu does not teach wherein a preamble of the third data frame indicates that the third data frame is a coded data frame that includes two data frames.
However, in an analogous art, Zhang teaches wherein a preamble of the third data frame (PHY data unit) indicates that the third data frame is a coded data frame that includes two data frames (PSDUs)(Abstract).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claim invention to take the teaching of Zhang and apply them on the teaching of Shapira – Yang - Baek -Chu for improving throughput in communication systems(Zhang; [0005]).
18. Claim 21 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Shapira (US 2007/0155353 A1) in view of Yang (US 2022/0368481 A1), in view of Baek (US 2022/0248375 A1), further in view of Moro (US 2020/0169323 A1).
Regarding claim 21, Shapira – Yang- Baek does not teach the first data frame corresponding to a first data packet, the second data frame corresponding to a second data packet.
However, in an analogous art, Moro teaches the first data frame corresponding to a first data packet, the second data frame corresponding to a second data packet ([0030] & [0038], data frames {1st and 2nd} in the form of packets {1st and 2nd}.).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claim invention to take the teaching of Moro and apply them on the teaching of Shapira – Yang - Baek to provide quality Internet service to unconnected residences around the globe, the infrastructure required to make a high capacity practical necessitates major advancements in terrestrial, airborne, and space-borne telecommunications technologies (Moro; [0002]).
Conclusion
19. Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
20. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MEHEDI S ALEY whose telephone number is (571)270-0439. The examiner can normally be reached Mon, Thus, Fri: 9-5. 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 M Rutkowski can be reached at 571-270-01215. 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.
/MEHEDI S ALEY/Examiner, Art Unit 2415
/JEFFREY M RUTKOWSKI/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2415
