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 .
DETAILED ACTION
a. Claims 1-24 in the present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, are being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
- claims 1, 7, 14, and 18 are amended
- claims 3, 9, 16, and 20 are canceled
b. This is a second non final on the merits based on Applicant’s claims submitted on 01/26/2026.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 04/04/2025 is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
Response to Arguments
Regarding claims 1-2, 7-8, 14-15, and 18-19 previously rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103, Applicant's arguments, see “A person having ordinary skill in the art will recognize that Beacon frames or Probe Request/Response frames are separate frames from Association Request frames and are, according to paragraph [0050] and Figure 4 above of Inohiza, transmitted in a separate step prior to step S401. For the above reasons, the combination of Patil, Inohiza and Stacey, whether considered individually or in combination, fail to teach or suggest all claim elements of independent claim 1.” on page 11, filed on 01/26/2026, with respect to Patil et al. US Pub 2019/0082373 (hereinafter “Patil”), in view of Inohiza US Pub 2023/0007716, claiming foreign application priority 2020-03-09 (hereinafter “Inohiza”), and further in view of Stacey et al. US Pub 2020/0221545, claiming provisional applications 62821198 and 62835346 priorities (hereinafter “Stacey”), have been fully considered and are persuasive. Therefore, the rejection has been withdrawn. However, upon further consideration, a new ground(s) of rejection is made in view of newly found disclosures in previously applied reference Stacey, in combination with previously applied reference Patil. See section Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103 below for complete details.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102 of this title, 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.
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.
Claims 1-2, 7-8, 10, 14-15, 18-19, and 23 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Patil et al. US Pub 2019/0082373 (hereinafter “Patil”), in view of Stacey et al. US Pub 2020/0221545, claiming provisional applications 62821198 and 62835346 priorities (hereinafter “Stacey”).
Regarding claim 1 (Currently Amended)
Patil discloses a method for wireless communication (“methods, systems, devices, or apparatuses that support techniques for multi-link aggregation signaling” [0005]), comprising:
receiving, by a multiple link station (i.e. “STA 115-a” in Fig. 2; “the STA 115 may connect with a multi-link capable STA” [0069]), an indication message (i.e. “capability indication 210” in Fig. 2) from a multiple link access point (ML-AP) (i.e. “AP 105-a” in Fig. 2; “AP 105-a may transmit a capability indication 210 (e.g., an ADDBA frame, a BAR, etc.) that may indicate multi-link capabilities” [0057]), the indication message indicating that the ML-AP is capable of transmitting information over one or more wireless links (“As an example, an AP 105-a may transmit a capability indication 210 (e.g., an ADDBA frame, a BAR, etc.) that may indicate multi-link capabilities to STA 115-a. Based on the capability indication 210, the AP 105-a and the STA 115-a may establish a multi-link session and/or a BA session.” [0057]);
Patil does not specifically teach transmitting, by the multiple link station, a first request message to the ML- AP, wherein the ML-AP is configured to associate the multiple link station to the one or more wireless links based on receiving the first request message; transmitting, by the multiple link station, a control request message to the ML-AP over the one or more wireless links, the control request message including information for a configuration of a multi-link transmission and a receiving chain; and receiving, by the multiple link station, a control response message from the ML-AP, wherein the multiple link station is configured to establish a multi-link transmission opportunity (TXOP) over the one or more wireless links configured based on the configuration of the multi- link transmission; wherein the first request message includes a multi-link capability information and a proposed multi-link configuration including a primary channel and alternate channels of the multiple link station.
In an analogous art, Stacey discloses transmitting, by the multiple link station (i.e. “multi-link STA device 520” [0068]), a first request message to the ML- AP (“a STA 504 of the client device 570 sends a Multi-link association request frame to the AP 502. This request contains an element describing the other STAs 504 that are part of the client device 570, which can be a multi-link or multi-band element, and can also include the number of links that the client device 570 can maintain at the same time (links: link between a non-AP STA 504 from a client device 570 and an AP 502 from a multi-link AP set 560).” [0141]), wherein the ML-AP (i.e. “multi-link AP device” [0068]) is configured to associate the multiple link station to the one or more wireless links based on receiving the first request message (“The AP 502 responds to this request with a multi-link association response frame that includes the parameters of the Multi-link AP set 560 (multi-link policy, multi-link capabilities, ability to share buffers, and/or other) and the list of APs 502 (each corresponding to an link with the STA 504) that are part of the multi-link AP set 560 and for which the corresponding STA 504 of the client device 570 will be automatically associated (in 802.11 terms).” [0142]);
transmitting, by the multiple link station (i.e. “multi-link STA device 520” [0068]), a control request message (e.g. “MU-RTS” [0125]) to the ML-AP over the one or more wireless links, the control request message including information for a configuration of a multi-link transmission and a receiving chain (“the STAs 504 may only activate its multiple receive chains and multi-band operations when necessary. That is, a STA 504 may only need to activate its multiple receive chains and/or multi-band operations if the Trigger or DL frames indicate the upcoming downlink transmission addressed to it will employ multiple spatial streams and/or multi-band. If not, the STA 504 can still operate in dynamic SM power save mode with only one receive chain in one band powered.” [0122]); and
receiving, by the multiple link station, a control response message from the ML-AP (“another indication field about the activation duration of receive chains in each band may be used in one or more of the following frames: A) Trigger frame (MU-RTS, User Info field); B) DL Data frames (A-Control, OMI); C) SM Power Save frame (SM Power Control field); and/or D) other.” [0129]), wherein the multiple link station is configured to establish a multi-link transmission opportunity (TXOP) (“In some embodiments, if the More Data subfield is set to 1, the STA 504 should keep activating its multiple Rx chains. In some cases, the More Data subfield in the MU-RTS Trigger frame is for all STAs 504, so may not be able to deliver the duration information individually to each STA 504. In some cases, the method cannot explicitly indicates the duration. That is, it only serves as an implicit indication of the effective duration, for example, the effective duration is to the end of the current TXOP.” [0131]) over the one or more wireless links configured based on the configuration of the multi- link transmission (“In FIG. 15, both STA 1 and STA 2 support concurrent multi-band operation. In some embodiments, a general process is as follows. Initially, the AP 502 and both STAs 504 are operating in 2.4/5 GHz band. The AP 502 starts a TXOP in the 2.4/5 GHz band and transmits an EHT MU PPDU in that band with signaling in EHT PHY preamble for 6 GHz band activation. Meanwhile the AP 502 also starts contending for channel access in 6 GHz independently. If the AP 502 is able to win the channel access in 6 GHz then it signals the STAs 1 and 2 to also start operating on the 6 GHz band by including some information in the preamble. FIG. 16 shows an example 1600 in which this information is contained in the EHT SIG-A and SIG-B.” [0161]);
wherein the first request message (i.e. “Multi-link association request frame”) includes a multi-link capability information and a proposed multi-link configuration (“a STA 504 of the client device 570 sends a Multi-link association request frame to the AP 502. This request contains an element describing the other STAs 504 that are part of the client device 570, which can be a multi-link or multi-band element, and can also include the number of links that the client device 570 can maintain at the same time (links: link between a non-AP STA 504 from a client device 570 and an AP 502 from a multi-link AP set 560)” [0141]) including a primary channel and alternate channels of the multiple link station (“The multi-link AP device 510 may be configured for multi-link communication on a plurality of channels. For each channel of the plurality of channels, at least one of the APs 502 of the multi-link AP device 510 may be configured for communication on the channel.” [0097]).
Before the effective filling date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify Patil’s techniques for multi-link aggregation signaling, to include Stacey’s method for multi-link discovery signaling, in order to maximize resources utilization efficiency (Stacey [0003]). Thus, a person of ordinary skill would have appreciated the ability to incorporate Stacey’s method for multi-link discovery signaling into Patil’s techniques for multi-link aggregation signaling since the claimed invention is merely a combination of old elements, and in the combination each element merely would have performed the same function as it did separately, and one of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized that the results of the combination were predictable.
Regarding claim 2
Patil, as modified by Stacey, previously discloses the method of claim 1, further comprising:
Stacey further discloses receiving, by the multiple link station (i.e. “multi-link STA device 520” [0068]), a control message from the ML-AP (“The multi-link AP device 510 may encode the frame to include signaling to enable multi-link discovery of the APs 502 of the multi-link AP device 510” [0105]), wherein the control message identifies a multi-radio configuration that includes the one or more wireless links (“The multi-link AP device 510 may encode the frame to include signaling to enable multi-link discovery of the APs 502 of the multi-link AP device 510. The multi-link AP device 510 may encode the signaling to include one or more of: a reduced neighbor report (RNR) element that identifies the APs 502 of the multi-link AP device 510; a multiple AP element; and/or other element(s). The multiple AP element may be configurable to include one or more of: common information for the APs 502 of the multi-link AP device 510; per-AP sub-elements that include per-AP information related to the APs 502 of the multi-link AP device 510; and/or other element(s).” [0105]).
Regarding claim 7 (Currently Amended)
Patil discloses a method for wireless communication (“methods, systems, devices, or apparatuses that support techniques for multi-link aggregation signaling” [0005]), comprising:
transmitting, by a multiple link access point (ML-AP) (i.e. “AP 105-a” in Fig. 2; “AP 105-a may transmit a capability indication 210 (e.g., an ADDBA frame, a BAR, etc.) that may indicate multi-link capabilities” [0057]), an indication message (i.e. “capability indication 210” in Fig. 2) to a multiple link station (i.e. “STA 115-a” in Fig. 2; “the STA 115 may connect with a multi-link capable STA” [0069]), the indication message indicating that the ML- AP is capable of transmitting information over at least one wireless link (“As an example, an AP 105-a may transmit a capability indication 210 (e.g., an ADDBA frame, a BAR, etc.) that may indicate multi-link capabilities to STA 115-a. Based on the capability indication 210, the AP 105-a and the STA 115-a may establish a multi-link session and/or a BA session.” [0057]);
Patil does not specifically teach receiving, by the ML-AP from the multiple link station, a first request message including a proposed multi-link configuration including a primary channel and alternate channels of the multiple link station to the ML-AP; associating one or more wireless links with the multiple link station based on the multi- link capability information; receiving, by the ML-AP, a control request message from the multiple link station over the one or more wireless links, the control request message including information for a configuration of a multi-link transmission and a receiving chain; and transmitting, by the ML-AP, a control response message to the multiple link station wherein the multiple link station is configured to establish a multi-link transmission opportunity (TXOP) over the one or more wireless links configured based on the received configuration of the multi-link transmission.
In an analogous art, Stacey discloses receiving, by the ML-AP (i.e. “multi-link AP device” [0068]) from the multiple link station (i.e. “multi-link STA device 520” [0068]), a first request message (i.e. “Multi-link association request frame”) including a proposed multi-link capability information (“a STA 504 of the client device 570 sends a Multi-link association request frame to the AP 502. This request contains an element describing the other STAs 504 that are part of the client device 570, which can be a multi-link or multi-band element, and can also include the number of links that the client device 570 can maintain at the same time (links: link between a non-AP STA 504 from a client device 570 and an AP 502 from a multi-link AP set 560).” [0141]) including a primary channel and alternate channels of the multiple link station to the ML-AP (“The multi-link AP device 510 may be configured for multi-link communication on a plurality of channels. For each channel of the plurality of channels, at least one of the APs 502 of the multi-link AP device 510 may be configured for communication on the channel.” [0097]);
associating one or more wireless links with the multiple link station based on the multi- link capability information (“The AP 502 responds to this request with a multi-link association response frame that includes the parameters of the Multi-link AP set 560 (multi-link policy, multi-link capabilities, ability to share buffers, and/or other) and the list of APs 502 (each corresponding to an link with the STA 504) that are part of the multi-link AP set 560 and for which the corresponding STA 504 of the client device 570 will be automatically associated (in 802.11 terms).” [0142]);
receiving, by the ML-AP (i.e. “multi-link AP device” [0068]), a control request message (e.g. “MU-RTS” [0125]) from the multiple link station (i.e. “multi-link STA device 520” [0068]) over the one or more wireless links, the control request message including information for a configuration of a multi-link transmission and a receiving chain (“the STAs 504 may only activate its multiple receive chains and multi-band operations when necessary. That is, a STA 504 may only need to activate its multiple receive chains and/or multi-band operations if the Trigger or DL frames indicate the upcoming downlink transmission addressed to it will employ multiple spatial streams and/or multi-band. If not, the STA 504 can still operate in dynamic SM power save mode with only one receive chain in one band powered.” [0122]); and
transmitting, by the ML-AP (i.e. “multi-link AP device” [0068]), a control response message to the multiple link station (“another indication field about the activation duration of receive chains in each band may be used in one or more of the following frames: A) Trigger frame (MU-RTS, User Info field); B) DL Data frames (A-Control, OMI); C) SM Power Save frame (SM Power Control field); and/or D) other.” [0129]) wherein the multiple link station (i.e. “multi-link STA device 520” [0068]) is configured to establish a multi-link transmission opportunity (TXOP) (“In some embodiments, if the More Data subfield is set to 1, the STA 504 should keep activating its multiple Rx chains. In some cases, the More Data subfield in the MU-RTS Trigger frame is for all STAs 504, so may not be able to deliver the duration information individually to each STA 504. In some cases, the method cannot explicitly indicates the duration. That is, it only serves as an implicit indication of the effective duration, for example, the effective duration is to the end of the current TXOP.” [0131]) over the one or more wireless links configured based on the received configuration of the multi-link transmission (“In FIG. 15, both STA 1 and STA 2 support concurrent multi-band operation. In some embodiments, a general process is as follows. Initially, the AP 502 and both STAs 504 are operating in 2.4/5 GHz band. The AP 502 starts a TXOP in the 2.4/5 GHz band and transmits an EHT MU PPDU in that band with signaling in EHT PHY preamble for 6 GHz band activation. Meanwhile the AP 502 also starts contending for channel access in 6 GHz independently. If the AP 502 is able to win the channel access in 6 GHz then it signals the STAs 1 and 2 to also start operating on the 6 GHz band by including some information in the preamble. FIG. 16 shows an example 1600 in which this information is contained in the EHT SIG-A and SIG-B.” [0161]).
Before the effective filling date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify Patil’s techniques for multi-link aggregation signaling, to include Stacey’s method for multi-link discovery signaling, in order to maximize resources utilization efficiency (Stacey [0003]). Thus, a person of ordinary skill would have appreciated the ability to incorporate Stacey’s method for multi-link discovery signaling into Patil’s techniques for multi-link aggregation signaling since the claimed invention is merely a combination of old elements, and in the combination each element merely would have performed the same function as it did separately, and one of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized that the results of the combination were predictable.
Regarding claim 8
The method of claim 7, further comprising:
transmitting, by the ML-AP, a control message to the multiple link station, wherein the control message identifies a multi-radio configuration that includes the one or more wireless links.
The scope and subject matter of method claim 8 are similar to the method as claimed in claim 2. Therefore method claim 8 corresponds to method claim 2 and is rejected for the same reasons of obviousness as used in claim 2 rejection above.
Regarding claim 10
Patil, as modified by Stacey, previously discloses the method of claim 7,
Stacey further discloses wherein a configuration of the multiple link station includes setting a state of a first link of the one or more wireless links to an enabled state if the first link was in a disabled state (“data transfer can happen on each link, each link can be activated/deactivated, data plane can be moved from one link to another or can be spread across multiple links, all in a transparent way to the upper layers (single MAC SAP to the DS), and with data continuity if the buffers are shared between the STAs 504 in the non-AP multi-link device 570, and between the APs 502 in the Multi-link AP set 560.” [0138]).
Regarding claim 14 (Currently Amended)
Patil discloses an apparatus (“device 1105” in Fig. 11; “Device 1105 may be an example of or include the components of wireless device 805, wireless device 905, or a STA 115” [0097]) for wireless communication, comprising:
a processor (“processor 1120” in Fig. 11; [0097]) that is configured to perform a method, the processor configured to:
receive, by a multiple link station, an indication message from a multiple link access point (ML-AP) (i.e. “AP 105-a” in Fig. 2, the indication message indicating that the ML-AP is capable of transmitting information over one or more wireless links;
transmit a first request message to the ML-AP, wherein the ML-AP is configured to associate the multiple link station to the one or more wireless links based on receiving the first request message,
wherein the first request message includes a multi-link capability information and a proposed multi-link configuration including a primary channel and alternate channels of the multiple link station;
transmit a control request message to the ML-AP over the one or more wireless links, the control request message including information for a configuration of a multi-link transmission and a receiving chain; and
receive a control response message from the ML-AP, wherein the multiple link station is configured to establish a multi-link transmission opportunity (TXOP) over the one or more wireless links configured based on the configuration of the multi-link transmission (as afore-mentioned in claim 1 rejection).
The scope and subject matter of apparatus claim 14 is drawn to the apparatus of using the corresponding method claimed in claim 1. Therefore apparatus claim 14 corresponds to method claim 1 and is rejected for the same reasons of obviousness as used in claim 1 rejection above.
Regarding claim 15
The apparatus of claim 14, wherein the processor is further configured to: receive a control message from the ML-AP, wherein the control message identifies a multi-radio configuration that includes the one or more wireless links.
The scope and subject matter of apparatus claim 15 is drawn to the apparatus of using the corresponding method claimed in claim 2. Therefore apparatus claim 15 corresponds to method claim 2 and is rejected for the same reasons of obviousness as used in claim 2 rejection above.
Regarding claim 18 (Currently Amended)
Patil discloses an apparatus (“wireless device 905” in Fig. 9; [0084]) for wireless communication, comprising:
a processor (“Wireless device 905 may also include a processor” [0084]) that is configured to perform a method, the processor configured to:
transmit, by a multiple link access point (ML-AP), an indication message to a multiple link station, the indication message indicating that the ML-AP is capable of transmitting information over at least one wireless link;
receive a first request message including multi-link capability information and a proposed multi-link configuration including a primary channel and alternate channels of the multiple link station to the ML-AP;
associate one or more wireless links with the multiple link station based on the multi-link capability information;
receive a control request message from the multiple link station over the one or more wireless links, the control request message including information for a configuration of a multi-link transmission and a receiving chain; and
transmit a control response message to the multiple link station wherein the multiple link station is configured to establish a multi-link transmission opportunity (TXOP) over the one or more wireless links configured based on the received configuration of the multi- link transmission (as afore-mentioned in claim 7 rejection).
The scope and subject matter of apparatus claim 18 is drawn to the apparatus of using the corresponding method claimed in claim 7. Therefore apparatus claim 18 corresponds to method claim 7 and is rejected for the same reasons of obviousness as used in claim 7 rejection above.
Regarding claim 19
The apparatus of claim 18, wherein the processor is further configured to:
transmitting, by the ML-AP, a control message to the multiple link station, wherein the control message identifies a multi-radio configuration that includes the one or more wireless links.
The scope and subject matter of apparatus claim 19 is drawn to the apparatus of using the corresponding method claimed in claim 8. Therefore apparatus claim 19 corresponds to method claim 8 and is rejected for the same reasons of obviousness as used in claim 8 rejection above.
Regarding claim 23
The apparatus of claim 18, wherein a configuration of the multiple link station includes setting a state of a first link of the one or more wireless links to an enabled state if the first link was in a disabled state.
The scope and subject matter of apparatus claim 23 is drawn to the apparatus of using the corresponding method claimed in claim 10. Therefore apparatus claim 23 corresponds to method claim 10 and is rejected for the same reasons of obviousness as used in claim 10 rejection above.
Claims 4, 6, 11, 13, 17, 22, and 24 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Patil, in view of Stacey, and further in view of Huang et al. US Pub 2017/0006542 (hereinafter “Huang”).
Regarding claim 4
Patil, as modified by Stacey, previously discloses the method of claim 1,
Patil and Stacey do not specifically teach wherein the control request message includes a ready-to-send (RTS) or a multi-user RTS (MU-RTS) message, and wherein the control response message includes clear-to-send (CTS) or multi-user clear-to-send (MU-CTS) message.
In an analogous art, Huang discloses wherein the control request message (i.e. “MU-RTS”) includes a ready-to-send (RTS) or a multi-user RTS (MU-RTS) message (“FIG. 2 illustrates a transmission opportunity (TXOP) 222. The TXOP 222 may begin with a multi-user request to send (MU-RTS) 210 being transmitted by an AP 206.” [0029]), and wherein the control response message includes clear-to-send (CTS) or multi-user clear-to-send (MU-CTS) message (“the HEW station 104 may encode a MU-CTS with a duration set to a duration based on the duration of the MU-RTS. The HEW station 104 may then transmit the MU-CTS.” [0056]).
Before the effective filling date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify Patil’s techniques for multi-link aggregation signaling, as modified by Stacey, to include Huang’s method for determining Network Allocation Vector, in order to facilitate MU-RTS/MU-CTS transmissions (Huang [Abstract]). Thus, a person of ordinary skill would have appreciated the ability to incorporate Huang’s method for determining Network Allocation Vector into Patil’s techniques for multi-link aggregation signaling since the claimed invention is merely a combination of old elements, and in the combination each element merely would have performed the same function as it did separately, and one of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized that the results of the combination were predictable.
Regarding claim 6
Patil, as modified by Stacey, previously discloses the method of claim 1,
Patil and Stacey do not specifically teach wherein a second multiple link station not associated with the one or more wireless links is configured to update a network-allocation vector (NAV) to prevent transmission of data during a multi-link transmission opportunity time period based on receiving any of a RTS/MU-RTS message and a CTS/MU-CTS message.
In an analogous art, Huang discloses wherein a second multiple link station (see Fig. 1) not associated with the one or more wireless links is configured to update a network-allocation vector (NAV) to prevent transmission of data during a multi-link transmission opportunity time period based on receiving any of a RTS/MU-RTS message and a CTS/MU-CTS message (“Some embodiments solve the technical problem that a MU-RTS may set a NAV and prevent the station from using the resource allocation indicated in the trigger frame.” [0063] and furthermore “In some embodiments, the HEW station 104 has two NAVs so that the HEW station 104 does not transmit in the situation described in FIG. 9. The HEW station 104 may have an OBSS NAV and an intra BSS (IBSS) NAV. The MU-RTS and trigger frame will set IBSS NAV of the stations. When HEW stations 104 determine whether to respond to a trigger frame or MU-RTS, the HEW stations 104 will not consider the IBSS NAV, but only the OBSS NAV, in accordance with some embodiments.” [0070]).
Before the effective filling date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify Patil’s techniques for multi-link aggregation signaling, as modified by Stacey, to include Huang’s method for determining Network Allocation Vector, in order to facilitate MU-RTS/MU-CTS transmissions (Huang [Abstract]). Thus, a person of ordinary skill would have appreciated the ability to incorporate Huang’s method for determining Network Allocation Vector into Patil’s techniques for multi-link aggregation signaling since the claimed invention is merely a combination of old elements, and in the combination each element merely would have performed the same function as it did separately, and one of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized that the results of the combination were predictable.
Regarding claim 11
The method of claim 7, wherein the control request message includes a ready-to-send (RTS) or a multi-user RTS (MU-RTS) message, and wherein the control response message includes clear-to-send (CTS) or multi-user clear-to-send (MU-CTS) message.
The scope and subject matter of method claim 11 are similar to the method as claimed in claim 4. Therefore method claim 11 corresponds to method claim 4 and is rejected for the same reasons of obviousness as used in claim 4 rejection above.
Regarding claim 13
The method of claim 7, wherein a second multiple link station not associated with the one or more wireless links is configured to update a network-allocation vector (NAV) to prevent transmission of data during a multi-link transmission opportunity time period based on receiving any of an RTS/MU-RTS message and a CTS/MU-CTS message.
The scope and subject matter of method claim 13 are similar to the method as claimed in claim 6. Therefore method claim 13 corresponds to method claim 6 and is rejected for the same reasons of obviousness as used in claim 6 rejection above.
Regarding claim 17
The apparatus of claim 14, wherein the control request message includes a ready-to-send (RTS) or a multi-user RTS (MU-RTS) message, and wherein the control response message includes clear-to-send (CTS) or multi-user clear-to-send (MU-CTS) message.
The scope and subject matter of apparatus claim 17 is drawn to the apparatus of using the corresponding method claimed in claim 4. Therefore apparatus claim 17 corresponds to method claim 4 and is rejected for the same reasons of obviousness as used in claim 4 rejection above.
Regarding claim 22
The apparatus of claim 14, wherein a second multiple link station not associated with the one or more wireless links is configured to update a network-allocation vector (NAV) to prevent transmission of data during a multi-link transmission opportunity time period based on receiving any of a RTS/MU-RTS message and a CTS/MU-CTS message.
The scope and subject matter of apparatus claim 22 is drawn to the apparatus of using the corresponding method claimed in claim 6. Therefore apparatus claim 22 corresponds to method claim 6 and is rejected for the same reasons of obviousness as used in claim 6 rejection above.
Regarding claim 24
The apparatus of claim 18, wherein the control request message includes a ready- to-send (RTS) or a multi-user RTS (MU-RTS) message, and wherein the control response message includes clear-to-send (CTS) or multi-user clear-to-send (MU-CTS) message.
The scope and subject matter of apparatus claim 24 is drawn to the apparatus of using the corresponding method claimed in claim 11. Therefore apparatus claim 24 corresponds to method claim 11 and is rejected for the same reasons of obviousness as used in claim 11 rejection above.
Claims 5, 12, and 21 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Patil, in view of Stacey, and further in view of Kim US Pub 2011/0090855 (hereinafter “Kim”).
Regarding claim 5
Patil, as modified by Stacey, previously discloses the method of claim 1, further comprising:
Patil and Stacey do not specifically teach transmitting, by the multiple link station, a ready-to-send (RTS) or multi-user ready-to-send (MU-RTS) message to the ML-AP associated with the station over the one or more wireless links associated with the multiple link station; and receiving, by the multiple link station, a clear-to-send (CTS) or multi-user clear-to-send (MU-CTS) message from the ML-AP associated with the multiple link station over the one or more wireless links associated with the multiple link station to establish a multi-link transmission opportunity (TXOP) across the one or more wireless links.
In an analogous art, Kim discloses transmitting, by the multiple link station (i.e. “second station 312”), a ready-to-send (RTS) (i.e. “RTS 331”) or multi-user ready-to-send (MU-RTS) message to the ML-AP (i.e. “AP 301”) associated with the multiple link station over the one or more wireless links associated with the multiple link station (“when the second station 312 transmits an RTS 331 to the AP 301” [0053]; Fig. 3); and
receiving, by the multiple link station (i.e. “second station 312”), a clear-to-send (CTS) or multi-user clear-to-send (MU-CTS) message (i.e. “CTS 332”) from the ML-AP (i.e. “AP 301”) associated with the station over the one or more wireless links associated with the multiple link station to establish a multi-link transmission opportunity (TXOP) across the one or more wireless links (“the AP 301 transmits a CTS 332 to the second station 312, the second station 312 transmits A-MPDU 333 to the AP 301. The AP 301 again transmits the block ACK 334 to the second station.” [0053]; Fig. 3).
Before the effective filling date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify Patil’s techniques for multi-link aggregation signaling, as modified by Stacey, to include Kim’s method for managing resources in a high capacity wireless communication system, in order to facilitate MU-MIMO transmissions (Kim [0003]). Thus, a person of ordinary skill would have appreciated the ability to incorporate Kim’s method for managing resources in a high capacity wireless communication system into Patil’s techniques for multi-link aggregation signaling since the claimed invention is merely a combination of old elements, and in the combination each element merely would have performed the same function as it did separately, and one of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized that the results of the combination were predictable.
Regarding claim 12
The method of claim 7, further comprising:
receiving, by the ML-AP, a ready-to-send (RTS) or multi-user ready-to-send (MU- RTS) message from the multiple link station over the one or more wireless links associated with the multiple link station; and
transmitting, by the ML-AP, a clear-to-send (CTS) or multi-user clear-to-send (MU-CTS) message to the multiple link station over the one or more wireless links associated with the multiple link station to establish a multi-link transmission opportunity (TXOP) across the one or more wireless links.
The scope and subject matter of method claim 12 are similar to the method as claimed in claim 5. Therefore method claim 12 corresponds to method claim 5 and is rejected for the same reasons of obviousness as used in claim 5 rejection above.
Regarding claim 21
The apparatus of claim 14, wherein the processor is further configured to:
transmit a ready-to-send (RTS) or multi-user ready-to-send (MU-RTS) message to the ML-AP associated with the multiple link station over the one or more wireless links associated with the multiple link station; and
receive a clear-to-send (CTS) or multi-user clear-to-send (MU-CTS) message from the ML-AP associated with the multiple link station over the one or more wireless links associated with the multiple link station to establish a multi-link transmission opportunity (TXOP) across the one or more wireless links.
The scope and subject matter of apparatus claim 21 is drawn to the apparatus of using the corresponding method claimed in claim 5. Therefore apparatus claim 21 corresponds to method claim 5 and is rejected for the same reasons of obviousness as used in claim 5 rejection above.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to CHUONG M NGUYEN whose telephone number is (571)272-8184. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 10:00am - 6:30pm.
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.
/CHUONG M NGUYEN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2411