Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application is being examined under the pre-AIA first to invent provisions.
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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 07/24/2026 has been entered.
Claims 1-16, 18-21 were previously rejected. Claim 1, 13, 18, 21 are amended. Claim 1-16, 18-21 are pending.
Information Disclosure Statement
An initialed and dated copy of Applicant’s IDS form 1449 submitted 08/29/2026 is attached to the instant office action. The submission 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
Applicant's arguments filed 07/24/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Examiner notes that with respect to the independent claims, the amendment submitted on 07/24/2026 re-inserts language that was previously examined and removed as shown in the claim set submitted on 04/08/2026. As such, the amendments do not change the scope of invention.
Applicant argues on page 10 of applicants remarks:
Paragraph [0084] provides the link in the written description between the version-indicating element and the probe request. That paragraph states: "[t]he AP may indicate change of information by adding a 'change sequence' to the short beacon to force STAs to listen for a full beacon or through probe request." Read together with paragraph [0085]'s description of the Change Sequence field 705 as the version- indicating element, paragraph [0084] expressly teaches a complete operational sequence: (1) the AP includes a change sequence as the version-indicating element in the short beacon; (2) the STA receives the short beacon comprising that element; (3) upon detecting that the element indicates a change, the STA sends a probe request. Because the STA's entire awareness of the version change derives from the change sequence element it received in the short beacon, a person having an ordinary skill in the art would immediately understand that the probe request sent in response to detecting that change is predicated on and in a functional sense includes that same element. The STA has no source of version information other than the element received in the short beacon, and the probe request is sent specifically to obtain information associated with the current version of the short beacon frame, as recited in Claim 21.
Examiner respectfully disagrees. As indicated in the previous office action, the instant disclosure does not provide support for including the element that indicates a version of the short beacon into a probe request. In response to the underlined portion above, when an STA receives a short beacon with a version number that triggers a probe request to request information, it is not obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art for that the STA to insert the received element indicating the version number into the probe request, as transmission of a probe request to the base station is indicative of the STA requiring additional network details. The STA can merely receive a short beacon that indicates a version number, determine that the version number of the short beacon does not match the stored known version number, and trigger a probe request for additional network details, all without inserting the version number into the probe request. For example, prior art Liu (US 2012/0314696) which was used previously in a 103 rejection of claim 1, in [0178]:
[0178] For example, in some embodiments, a network interface of a station (e.g., the AP 14), generates beacons having less information as compared to the beacons described in the current IEEE 802.11 Standard, for example. In an embodiment, a beacon frame includes certain basic service set (BSS) information such as a timestamp, a beacon interval, a service set identifier (SSID), etc., but omits other information that is included in beacons described in the current IEEE 802.11 Standard, for example. In an embodiment, the beacon includes recently updated (e.g., updated since the immediately previous beacon was transmitted, updated within a certain amount of time, etc.) BSS information. In an embodiment, if a number of BSS information elements (IEs) that recently changed is large enough so that all of the IEs that recently changed cannot fit within one beacon frame, the network interface may be configured to distribute the IEs that recently changed amongst several beacon frames. In another embodiment, if a number of BSS information elements (IEs) that recently changed is large enough so that all of the IEs that recently changed cannot fit within one beacon frame, the network interface may be configured to include in the beacon an indication of changed BSS IEs that prompts stations to poll the AP to cause the AP to transmit the changed BSS IEs in response to the poll. For example, the beacon includes a field that indicates whether BSS IEs have changed and that prompts stations to poll the AP to cause the AP to transmit the changed BSS IEs in response to the poll, in an embodiment. In an embodiment, in response to such a poll, the network interface of the AP transmits information that conveys the changed IEs to the polling station. In an embodiment, a station polls the AP for information regarding changed IEs using a probe request frame, and the AP responds to the probe request frame with a probe response frame, where the probe response frame includes the requested information.
As described in the recitation above, an AP sends a shortened beacon include a changed BSS IE, in which a station polls the AP for information regarding changed IEs using a probe request frame, which shows that a probe request can be sent in response to determining that network details have changed, in which the probe request does not have to include a version number. As such, examiner maintains that it is not obvious to one of ordinary skilled in the art, based on the context of [0084]-[0085] of the instant application, to include the element that indicates a version of the short beacon into the probe request.
Furthermore, regarding the statement that “the STA has no source of version information other than the element received in the short beacon”, the claims explicitly recites “based on the element indicating that the short beacon has changed from a known version of the short beacon, sending a probe request…”. This claim recitation explicitly states that the STA receives a short beacon with a version number and compares it to a known version of the short beacon, hence the STA having knowledge of TWO version numbers. As such, it is not obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to include the element received in the short beacon into the probe request without additional support from the specification.
Applicant further argues on pages 10-11 of applicants remarks:
As set forth in the Office Action, paragraph [0084] describes only the STA's act of sending a probe request, not the probe request including the version-indicating element. Applicant respectfully submits that this reading unduly narrows the specification. Paragraph [0084] must be read in conjunction with the full context of the specification, including paragraph [0085]'s detailed description of the Change Sequence field 705. The Examiner acknowledges that the Change Sequence field in the short beacon functions as a version indicator. The Examiner also acknowledges that the STA sends a probe request when it detects a change via that element. The amended claims further specify that the probe request sent by the STA includes that same element. A position that is entirely consistent with the specification's description of a STA that uses the received change sequence to drive its probe request behavior and to convey its understanding of the current version to the AP. Paragraph [0077] of the specification additionally teaches that:
[a] STA may also obtain the change indicator of the received beacon from the signaling in the MAC header, PLCP preamble or SIG field. If the change indicator signals that the content of this beacon-level or the next higher level does not change since its last transmission, it may skip reception and decoding of the rest of the corresponding unchanged beacon to save power,
further demonstrating that the STA maintains and acts upon the version-indicating element it receives. A person having an ordinary skill in the art, reading the specification as a whole, would recognize that the inventors possessed the concept of the STA incorporating the received version-indicating element into the probe request it sends to the AP upon detecting a change.
Examiner respectfully disagrees. As described in [0084]-[0085], there is only support for (1) the AP includes a change sequence as the version-indicating element in the short beacon; (2) the STA receives the short beacon comprising that element; (3) upon detecting that the element indicates a change, the STA sends a probe request, as described by the applicant. There is no support for “incorporating the received version indicating element into the probe request” that it sends to the AP upon detecting a change. As indicated above, the station upon receiving the short beacon, has knowledge of both the current version of the short beacon as received, and a known version of the short beacon. Furthermore, as described in Liu above, the station is able to request current network details via a probe request without incorporation of a version number, based on receiving a shortened beacon indicating that the beacon has changed. As such, it is not obvious to incorporate the received version indicating element into the probe request.
Regarding [0077] of the specification as seen in the applicants argument above, merely obtaining the change information from the base station and sending a probe request in response to determining that the version number has changed does not imply incorporation of the version number information into the probe request. Examiner maintains that the disclosure only has support for transmission of a probe request in response to determining that a version has changed, and does not have support for transmission of a probe request including the element indicating a version of the short beacon.
Regarding the 103 rejections for claims 18, 19, and 21, the new amendments overcomes the previous prior art rejection. As such, the 103 rejection of claims 18-21 are withdrawn. However, claims 18-21 are still rejected based on 112 1st.
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 1-16, 18-21 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 written description requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention.
Claim 1 (and similarly claims 13 and 21) recites “wherein the probe request includes the element that indicates a version of the short beacon”. Examiner notes that the instant application does not provide disclosure that supports such a feature. For example, [0065], [0081], [0084] are the only recitations that further describe the claimed “probe request”, but does not further provide any evidence of a probe request include a version of the short beacon. [0058], [0068]-[0072], and [0077], are disclosure that provides evidence of a beacon including a version number, but does not indicate a probe request including a version of the short beacon. [0062], [0068]-[0072], [0077], [0084]-[0085], all provide disclosure for a change count or change indicator of a short beacon sent by an AP, but does not describe a probe request including a version of the short beacon.
Specifically, [0084] of the instant application recites:
[0084] AP/STA behavior with respect to short beacons may include the AP broadcasting regular beacons at a Beacon Interval and short beacons between the regular beacons. The STAs may acquire basic information about the AP through the short beacon, and only acquired at association by listening to full beacon or with a probe request. Once a STA is associated with the AP, it may listen to short beacons for synchronization. The AP may indicate change of information by adding a "change sequence" to the short beacon to force STAs to listen for a full beacon or through probe request.
As shown above in the recitation of [0084], the functions of the AP includes: broadcasts regular beacons and short beacons to the STA.
The functions of the STA include: acquiring basic information about the AP through the short beacon, and only acquired at association by listening to full beacon or with a probe request.
Examiner further reiterates that it is the STA that sends a probe request to the AP, and not the AP sending the probe request.
In other words, the STA receives a short beacon from the AP indicating change, in which results in the STA listening to a full beacon to determine what has changed OR the STA sends a probe request to find out what has changed. The AP is not indicating change through a probe request that is sent by a STA.
There is no evidence in the specification that shows the probe request, sent by the STA, indicates a version of the short beacon. As such, the claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification.
Claims 2-12, 14-16, 18-20 are dependent claims that are rejected for reciting similar limitations as indicated in corresponding parent claims 1, 13, and 21.
Conclusion
All claims are identical to or patentably indistinct from, or have unity of invention with claims in the application prior to the entry of the submission under 37 CFR 1.114 (that is, restriction (including a lack of unity of invention) would not be proper) and all claims could have been finally rejected on the grounds and art of record in the next Office action if they had been entered in the application prior to entry under 37 CFR 1.114. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL even though it is a first action after the filing of a request for continued examination and the submission under 37 CFR 1.114. See MPEP § 706.07(b). 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.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JENKEY VAN whose telephone number is (571)270-7160. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 9am - 5pm.
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, Chirag Shah can be reached at (571)272-3144. 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.
/JENKEY VAN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2477
Prosecution Insights