DETAILED ACTION
CONTINUED EXAMINATION UNDER 37 CFR 1.114
1. 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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 June 11, 2026, has been entered.
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
2. The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Response to Arguments
3. Applicant's arguments, filed on June 11, 2026, with respect to objections to claims 6 and 18 have been considered and are persuasive. Objections to claims 6 and 18 have been withdrawn, with the exception noted below.
4. Applicant’s arguments regarding rejection of claims 1, 3-7, 11, and 13-17 under 35 U.S.C. 103 have been considered but are moot because the arguments do not apply to any combination of the references being used in the current rejection. Examiner has applied Fisher ‘455 (US 2017/0078455, “Fisher ‘455”) to clearly teach the amended limitations in claims 1, 3-7, 11, and 13-17.
Claim Objections
5. Claim 6 is objected to because of the following informalities:
“A multilink element" in claim 6 (line 2) should be replaced with - - the multilink element - - to be consistent with the first citation of “a multilink element” in claim 1 (line 2).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
6. 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.
7. Claims 1, 3-7, 11, and 13-17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Xiao ‘871 (US 11,329,871, “Xiao ‘871”), in view of Guo ‘425 (US 2024/0155425, “Guo ‘425”), and further in view of Fisher ‘455 (US 2017/0078455, “Fisher ‘455”).
Regarding claims 1 and 11, Xiao ‘871 discloses a system (FIG. 1, col. 7:15-45; WLAN apparatus 150 operating multiple BSSs) comprising:
processing circuitry (FIG. 15, col. 35:48-53, col. 37:1-16; processor 1502 with functionality implemented in an integrated circuit) arranged to:
generate a management frame (FIG. 1, col. 5:24-51, col. 7:46-67, col. 8:1-19, col. 9:35-50; multiple BSSID management unit 156 in the WLAN apparatus 150 generates a management frame for multiple BSSIDs and transmits the management frame to stations (STAs) in the WLAN, via virtual access points (VAPs), where each VAP communicates with a corresponding STA via a wireless link),
the management frame comprising a multilink element comprising a per-station profile of an access point (AP) affiliated with an AP multilink device (MLD) having a non-transmitted basic service set identifier (BSSID) AP (FIGS. 1 -2 and 12, col. 5:52-67, col. 6:1-4, col. 8:20-37, col. 10:7-67, col. 11:1-5, and col. 32:9-67; management frame for multiple BSSIDs includes NonTxBSSID profile elements 272, 274, and 276 for corresponding VAPs 152, 153, and 154, where each VAP communicates with a corresponding STA via a wireless link; WLAN apparatus includes VAPs 152, 153, and 154; the management frame includes a multi-link element, where the multi-link element includes a link profile; thus, WLAN apparatus is an AP multilink device; therefore, management frame for multiple BSSIDs includes a multi-link element and per-station profiles affiliated with an AP multilink device having NonTxBSSID VAPs 152, 153, and 154),
the two or more elements are not in a multiple BSSID element (FIG. 3, col: 12:18-67, col. 13:1-38; elements 320 are not in multiple BSSID elements 330); and
transmit the management frame to a station (FIG. 1, col. 5:24-51, col. 7:46-67, col. 8:1-19, col. 9:35-50; multiple BSSID management unit generates a management frame and transmits the management frame to the STAs in the WLAN),
wherein a non-AP of the station associates with the AP MLD based on the management frame (FIG. 1, col. 9:35-50; a station receives the management frame and communicates with its corresponding VAP; thus, the station, which is a non-AP, associates with the WLAN apparatus that includes the station’s corresponding VAP, based on the received management frame).
However, Xiao ‘871 does not specifically disclose the per-station profile carried in two or more elements within the multilink element, one or more of the two or more elements comprising an element identifier which is a fragment identifier, a length, and an information field which carries a respective fragment of the per-station profile. Further, although Xiao ‘871 discloses wherein a non-AP of the station associates with the AP MLD based on the management frame, Xiao ‘871 does not specifically disclose wherein a non-AP MLD of the station associates with the AP MLD.
Guo ‘425 teaches the per-station profile carried in two or more elements within the multilink element (FIGS. 1-2 and 6, para 4, 115-118, and 161-168; per-STA profile for a link is fragmented into multiple subelements within the current multi-link element (MLE); thus, the per-STA profile is carried in multiple subelements; “subelements” of Guo ‘425 read on the recited “elements”),
one or more of the two or more elements comprising an element identifier which is a fragment identifier, a length, and an information field which carries a respective fragment of the per-station profile (FIGS. 1-2, 6, and 7a, para 150-151 and 161-168; per-STA profile for the link is fragmented into multiple per-STA profile subelements, where each per-STA profile subelement includes a subelement ID, a length, and a data field which carries a respective subelement of the per-STA profile; as the per-STA profile for the link is fragmented into the multiple per-STA profile subelements, the multiple per-STA subelements are fragments of the per-STA profile; thus, a subelement ID is a fragment ID; “subelements” read on the “elements”; “a subelement ID” reads on “an element identifier which is a fragment identifier”; “a data field which carries a respective subelement of the per-SA profile” reads on “an information field which carries a respective fragment of the per-station profile”)
wherein at least one of the two or more elements carries a first fragment of the same per-station profile and another of the two or more elements is a fragment element comprising a fragment identifier field, a length field, and a per-station profile field carrying a respective subsequent fragment of the same per- station profile (FIGS. 1-2, 6, and 7a, para 150-151 and 161-168; per-STA profile for the link is fragmented into multiple per-STA profile subelements, where each per-STA profile subelement includes a subelement ID, a length, and a data field which carries a respective subelement of the per-STA profile), and
wherein a non-AP MLD of the station associates with the AP MLD (FIGS. 1-2, para 115-119; non-AP MLD STA device associates with an AP MLD).
Therefore, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine Xiao ‘871’s system generating a management frame, to include Guo ‘425’s non-AP MLD STA device that associates with an AP MLD. The motivation for doing so would have been to avoid radio frame transmission failure and improve communication efficiency (Guo ‘425, para 6).
However, Xiao ‘871 in combination with Guo ‘425 does not specifically disclose wherein the fragment identifier field identifies the fragment element as carrying the respective subsequent fragment of the same per-station profile.
In a similar field of endeavor, Fisher ‘455 teaches wherein the fragment identifier field identifies the fragment element as carrying the respective subsequent fragment of the same per-station profile (para 230-231; a protocol frame is split into subframes, where each subframe includes a frame ID; thus, each subframe within the protocol frame includes an ID that indicates that the subframe is part of the same profile frame).
Therefore, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to add features to the combined system of Xiao ‘871 and Guo ‘425, to include Fisher ‘455’s protocol frame is split into subframes, where each subframe includes a frame ID. The motivation for doing so would have been to provide a customizable networking system (Fisher ‘455, para 3 and 6).
Regarding claim 3, Xiao ‘871 in combination with Guo ‘425 and Fisher ‘455 discloses all the limitations with respect to claim 1, as outlined above.
Further, Guo ‘425 teaches wherein respective fragments of the per-station profile are carried in the two or more elements when a length of the per-station profile is greater than a maximum length of the per-station profile field (para 8, 86, 161-168, Table 2; per-STA profile information is fragmented into per-STA profile subelements when a new and additional subelement is used to carry information that cannot be carried in a per-STA profile of a maximum length; the maximum length is configured by an information element; thus, per-STA profile information is fragmented into multiple subelements when the required per-STA profile length is greater than a maximum length, where the maximum length is configured by an information element).
Therefore, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to add features to the combined system of Xiao ‘871, Guo ‘425, and Fisher ‘455, to further include Guo ‘425’s per-STA profile information that is fragmented into per-STA profile subelements when a new subelement is used to carry information that cannot be carried in the per-STA profile. The motivation for doing so would have been to avoid radio frame transmission failure and improve communication efficiency (Guo ‘425, para 6).
Regarding claims 4 and 14, Xiao ‘871 in combination with Guo ‘425 and Fisher ‘455 discloses all the limitations with respect to claims 1 and 11, respectively, as outlined above.
Further, Xiao ‘871 teaches wherein the per-station profile defines capabilities, parameters, and operational data of the AP affiliated with the same AP MLD as the nontransmitted BSSID AP (FIGS. 1 and 2, col. 10:7-67, col. 11:1-5; NonTx VAP’s BSSID management frame includes capabilities, parameters, and operation information; the NonTx VAP is part of the WLAN apparatus that is an AP MLD).
Regarding claims 5 and 15, Xiao ‘871 in combination with Guo ‘425 and Fisher ‘455 discloses all the limitations with respect to claims 1 and 11, respectively, as outlined above.
Further, Xiao ‘871 teaches wherein the non-transmitted BSSID AP does not transmit a beacon frame (FIG. 1, col. 5:24-51; AP transmits management frames that are Probe response frames and not beacon frames).
Regarding claims 6 and 16, Xiao ‘871 in combination with Guo ‘425 and Fisher ‘455 discloses all the limitations with respect to claims 1 and 11, respectively, as outlined above.
Further, Guo ‘425 teaches wherein a fragment of another per-station profile is further included in a subelement of a multilink element (FIGS. 1-2 and 6, para 150-151 and 161-168; as seen in FIG. 6, multiple per-station profiles are included in a portion of a multilink element).
Therefore, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to add features to the combined system of Xiao ‘871, Guo ‘425, and Fisher ‘455, to further include Guo ‘425’s multiple per-station profiles that are included in a portion of a multilink element. The motivation for doing so would have been to avoid radio frame transmission failure and improve communication efficiency (Guo ‘425, para 6).
Regarding claims 7 and 17, Xiao ‘871 in combination with Guo ‘425 and Fisher ‘455 discloses all the limitations with respect to claims 6 and 16, respectively, as outlined above.
Further, Xiao ‘871 teaches wherein another management frame is an Action frame transmitted by the nontransmitted BSSID AP in response to a multilink probe request received by the nontransmitted BSSID AP (FIG. 1, col. 5:24-67, col. 6:1-4, col. 8:20-37; NonTx BSSID VAP transmits a Probe response frame, sent in response to a received Probe request).
Furthermore, Guo ‘425 teaches a multilink probe request that carries the multilink element (FIGS. 1-2 and 6, para 123 and 150-151; an association request frame carries a multilink element).
Therefore, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to add features to the combined system of Xiao ‘871, Guo ‘425, and Fisher ‘455, to further include Guo ‘425’s request frame that carries a multilink element. The motivation for doing so would have been to avoid radio frame transmission failure and improve communication efficiency (Guo ‘425, para 6).
Regarding claim 13, Xiao ‘871 in combination with Guo ‘425 and Fisher ‘455 discloses all the limitations with respect to claim 11, as outlined above.
Further, Guo ‘425 teaches wherein respective fragments of the per-station profile are carried in the two or more elements when the per-station profile of the per-station profile element is greater than a maximum length of the information field (para 8, 86, 165-168, Table 2; per-STA profile information is fragmented into per-STA profile subelements when a new subelement is used to carry information that cannot be carried in the per-STA profile; thus, per-STA profile information is fragmented when the required per-STA profile length is greater than a maximum, where the maximum length is configured by an information element).
Therefore, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to add features to the combined system of Xiao ‘871, Guo ‘425, and Fisher ‘455, to further include Guo ‘425’s per-STA profile for a link that is fragmented into multiple per-STA profile subelements. The motivation for doing so would have been to avoid radio frame transmission failure and improve communication efficiency (Guo ‘425, para 6).
Conclusion
Internet Communication
Applicant is encouraged to submit a written authorization for Internet communications (PTO/SB/439, https://www.uspto.gov/sites/default/files/documents/sb0439.pdf) in the instant patent application to authorize the examiner to communicate with the applicant via email. The authorization will allow the examiner to better practice compact prosecution. The written authorization can be submitted via one of the following methods only. (1) Central Fax which can be found in the Conclusion section of this Office action; (2) regular postal mail; (3) EFS WEB; or (4) the service window on the Alexandria campus. EFS web is the recommended way to submit the form since this allows the form to be entered into the file wrapper within the same day (system dependent). Written authorization submitted via other methods, such as direct fax to the examiner or email, will not be accepted. See MPEP § 502.0.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to NEVENA SANDHU whose telephone number is (571) 272-0679. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday-Thursday 9AM-5PM EST, Friday variable.
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, Michael Thier can be reached on (571)272-2832. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/NEVENA ZECEVIC SANDHU/Examiner, Art Unit 2474
/Michael Thier/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2474
Prosecution Insights