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 .
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on 2-3-2026 has been entered.
Response to Arguments
As to the 112 rejections, the examiner needs to know the scope of the “associate” step and for that needs to know what the apparatus is required to do in the step, but the claim language neither the specification helps, after reviewing par. 0070-0074, the section is explained as possibilities; thereby, it is unclear what it is actually required to accomplish the associate step. So, the question remains unanswered. What the apparatus is required to do in the associate step? Please clarify. Also, note that the limitation: “to establish a control link and a second STA of the non-AP MLD with the managed AP to establish a managed link” is intended use. Please see MPEP 2111.02 II. For examination purposes, anything related to wireless signals is associated.
Regarding the arguments directed to the amended limitations, please see the new grounds of rejection below.
The rest of the arguments they fall for the same reasons as shown above.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a):
(a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention.
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112:
The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor of carrying out his invention.
Claims 1-15 and 26-35 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the enablement requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to enable one skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and/or use the invention. Parent claims recite the limitation: “associate, via the control AP STA, a first STA of a non-AP MLD with the control AP STA…”, since the specification includes a plurality of limitations using similar relative language it is unclear if the specification does disclose the limitation and where the support could be found. The rest of the claims they share the deficiency by virtue of dependency.
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 1-15 and 26-35 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. Parent claims recite the limitation: “associate, via the control AP STA, a first STA of a non-AP MLD with the control AP STA…”, since the specification includes a plurality of limitations using similar relative language it is unclear if the specification does disclose the limitation and the scope of the limitation. The rest of the claims they share the deficiency by virtue of dependency.
Claims 10-15 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. The claims recite a plurality of “a first time interval”, it is unclear if they refer to the same interval or if they are a plurality of fist time intervals. If they refer to the same interval please use: the first time interval.
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 (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
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.
Claim(s) 1-15, 26-32 and 35 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Asterjadhi 20210007168 in view of Montemurro 20230319925.
As to claim 1, Asterjadhi discloses an apparatus [1100] comprising: a memory [1108]; and logic circuitry [1106] of a multi-link device (MLD) coupled with the memory (see fig. 11) to:
manage multiple link operations for more than one access point (AP) stations (STAs) [NON-AP MLD], wherein the more than one AP STAs include a control AP STA [AP MLD] and a managed AP STA (see par. 0101);
associate, via the control AP STA, a first STA of a non-AP MLD with the control AP STA to establish a control link and a second STA of the non-AP MLD with the managed AP to establish a managed link (see par. 0102-0105);
receive signaling from a 2nd BSS AP MLD to coordinate scheduling in the managed link with the neighbor AP MLD (see par. 0117, 0138);
cause transmission of a management frame, by the control AP STA, via the control link to establish a first target wake time (TWT) service period (SP) on the managed link during a first-time interval in the managed link for the first TWT SP (see fig. 4c; par. 0138); and
receive, by the managed AP STA, an uplink (UL) transmission of an ACK from the second STA via the managed link during the first time interval (see fig. 4c; par. 0138). Asterjadhi does not explicitly recite a first PDU; however, from par. 0118-0119, becomes clear that the ack is a PDU. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of the ordinary skills in the art before the effective filing date of the present invention that the ack is a PDU for the simple purpose of compatibility with existing standards.
Asterjadhi does not explicitly recite wherein the management frame comprises an assignment of a resource unit (RU) for the second STA.
In an analogous art, Montemurro discloses wherein the management frame comprises an assignment of a resource unit (RU) for the second STA (see abstract). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of the ordinary skills in the art before the effective filing date of the present invention to combine the teachings for the simple purpose of coordinating communications with affiliated stations.
As to claim 2, Asterjadhi discloses the apparatus of claim 1, wherein the logic circuitry comprises baseband processing circuitry and further comprising a radio coupled with the baseband processing circuitry, and one or more antennas coupled with the radio to transmit the PDU (see par. 0118, 0127).
As to claim 3, Asterjadhi discloses the apparatus of claim 1, the logic circuitry to further negotiate, by the control AP STA with the first STA, the first TWT SP for the managed link (see par. 0138).
As to claim 4, Asterjadhi discloses the apparatus of claim 3, negotiation of the first TWT SP for the managed link to comprise negotiation a recurring or periodic individual TWT SP on a managed link for a downlink (DL), an uplink (UL), both UL and DL, a peer-to-peer (P2P) communication, sounding, scheduling, buffer reporting, or a resource request or the first TWT SP (see par. 0138).
As to claim 5, Asterjadhi discloses the apparatus of claim 3, the logic circuitry to further receive a management frame from the first STA (see par. 0108, 0131), by the control AP STA, to negotiate the first TWT SP for the managed link (see par. 0138).
As to claim 6, Asterjadhi discloses the apparatus of claim 3, further comprising assigning an association identifier (AID) to the first STA (see par. 0115) for the first TWT SP (see par. 0138) via a short term or dynamic scheduling information SP element or via a long term scheduling information SP element in a frame body of the management frame (see par. 0038, 0106, 0108).
As to claim 7, Asterjadhi discloses the apparatus of claim 3, wherein the management frame comprises an uplink (UL) transmission bandwidth and an UL transmission rate for the second STA in the managed link for the first TWT SP (see par. 0019).
As to claim 8, Asterjadhi discloses the apparatus of claim 3, negotiation of the first TWT SP for the managed link to establish allowable communications during the first TWT SP, the allowable communications to include downlinks (DLs), uplinks (ULs), sounding, scheduling, buffer reporting, resource requests, peer-to-peer transmissions, or a combination thereof [please note that the claim does not require any structural difference or change to the TWT SP, the same TWT SP will allow the same communications] (see par. 0138).
As to claim 9, Asterjadhi discloses the apparatus of claim 3, negotiation of the first TWT SP for the managed link to establish allowable traffic identifiers (TIDs) (see par. 0105-0106) during the first TWT SP. (see par. 0138).
As to claim 10, Asterjadhi discloses an non-transitory computer-readable medium, comprising instructions, which when executed by a processor, cause the processor to perform operations to:
manage multiple link operations for more than one access point (AP) stations (STAs) [NON-AP MLD], wherein the more than one AP STAs include a control AP STA [AP MLD] and a managed AP STA (see par. 0101);
associate, via the control AP STA, a first STA of a non-AP MLD with the control AP STA to establish a control link and a second STA of the non-AP MLD with the managed AP to establish a managed link (see par. 0102-0105);
cause transmission of a management frame, by the control AP STA, via the control link to establish a first target wake time (TWT) service period (SP) on the managed link during a first-time interval in the managed link for the first TWT SP on the managed link during a first-time interval, wherein the management frame comprises an uplink (UL) transmission bandwidth for the managed link for the first TWT SP (see fig. 4c; par. 0019, 0138); and
receive, by the managed AP STA, an uplink (UL) transmission of an ACK from the second STA via the managed link during the first time interval (see fig. 4c; par. 0138). Asterjadhi does not explicitly recite a first PDU; however, from par. 0118-0119, becomes clear that the ack is a PDU. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of the ordinary skills in the art before the effective filing date of the present invention that the ack is a PDU for the simple purpose of compatibility with existing standards. Asterjadhi does not explicitly recite wherein the management frame comprises an assignment for the second STA.
In an analogous art, Montemurro discloses wherein the management frame comprises an assignment for the second STA (see abstract). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of the ordinary skills in the art before the effective filing date of the present invention to combine the teachings for the simple purpose of coordinating communications with affiliated stations.
Regarding claim 11, is the corresponding non-transitory computer-readable medium of apparatus claim 3. Therefore, claims 11 is rejected for the same reasons as shown above.
As to claims 12 and 32, Asterjadhi discloses the non-transitory computer-readable medium of claim 11, negotiation of the first TWT SP for the managed link (see par. 0138) and establish trigger-based access (see par. 0183). Asterjadhi does not explicitly disclose for the second STA during a second TWT SP; however, it would be obvious that the process can be repeated and will produce the same predictable result of negotiating the desired link. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of the ordinary skills in the art before the effective filing date of the present invention to repeat the step for the simple purpose of adjusting the links as the communication need change.
As to claim 13 and 29, Asterjadhi discloses the operations to further assign, via the control AP STA, the second STA to the first TWT SP for the managed link via the management frame, wherein the management frame comprises an association response frame, a reassociation response frame, or a probe response frame (see par. 0102, 0115).
As to claims 14, Asterjadhi does not explicitly recite wherein the management frame comprises an assignment of a resource unit (RU) for the second STA. In an analogous art, Montemurro discloses wherein the management frame comprises an assignment of a resource unit (RU) for the second STA (see abstract). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of the ordinary skills in the art before the effective filing date of the present invention to combine the teachings for the simple purpose of coordinating communications with affiliated stations.
As to claims 15 and 31, Asterjadhi discloses the non-transitory computer-readable medium of claim 10, the operations to further coordinate TWT SPs including the first TWT SP by the managed AP on the managed link with communications of a second managed AP on a second managed link (see fig. 4c; par. 0138).
Regarding claims 26-27 and 35, they are the corresponding method claims of non-transitory computer-readable medium claims 10-11 and 14. Therefore, claims 26-27 and 35 are rejected for the same reasons as shown above.
As to claim 28, Asterjadhi discloses the method of claim 27, further comprising receiving a management frame from the first STA (see par. 0108, 0131), by the control AP STA, to negotiate the first TWT SP for the managed link (see par. 0138).
As to claim 30, Asterjadhi discloses the operations to further advertise, via the control AP STA, the managed link via transmission of additional management frames on the control link (see par. 0003, 0102, 0105, 0115).
Claim(s) 33 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Asterjadhi in view of Montemurro and further in view of Chu 11523306.
As to claim 33, Asterjadhi discloses the apparatus of claim 3, negotiation of the first TWT SP for the managed link to comprise negotiation of periodicity of the first TWT SP (see par. 0138). Asterjadhi fails to disclose TWT SP start time. In an analogous art, Chu discloses negotiating a TWT SP start time (see col. 10, lines 31- 38). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of the ordinary skills in the art before the effective filing date of the present invention to negotiate a TWT start time to better use the communication resources.
Claim(s) 34 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Asterjadhi in view of Montemurro and further in view of Lu 11516841.
As to claim 34, Asterjadhi discloses negotiation of the first TWT SP for the managed link parameters for the first TWT SP (see fig. 4c; par. 0138). Asterjadhi fails to disclose enhanced distributed channel access. In analogous art, Lu discloses negotiation of the first TWT SP for the managed link to comprise negotiation of enhanced distributed channel access (EDCA) (see col. 12, line 51-65). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of the ordinary skills in the art before the effective filing date of the present invention to repeat the step for the simple purpose of adjusting the links as the communication requirement changes.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MARCOS L TORRES whose telephone number is (571)272-7926. The examiner can normally be reached 10:00 AM - 6:00 PM M-F.
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, Alison Slater can be reached at (571)270-0375. 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.
MARCOS L. TORRES
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 2647
/MARCOS L TORRES/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2647
Prosecution Insights