DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application is being examined under the pre-AIA first to invent provisions.
Response to Amendment
Acknowledgement is made of amendment filed on 04/08/2026. The amendments of Applicant are entered and have been considered by Examiner. Claims 1-16, 18-21 are pending. Claim 17 has been canceled. Claims 1, 3, 13, 15 are amended.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 04/08/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Examiner notes that the claims 1 and 13 now recite claim language of a station configured to “send a probe request, wherein the probe request
Regarding the 112 rejections of claims 1 and 13, applicant argues on 8-10 of applicants remarks:
PNG
media_image1.png
614
872
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Examiner respectfully disagrees. The claim is directed to a station performing the step of sending a probe request (to the network). As recited in [0084] of the instant application:
[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 does not send a probe request. The AP does not add a change sequence to a probe request. The AP is not indicating change through a probe request that is sent by a STA. The only probe request disclosed is the probe request sent by the STA.
Specifically referring to the “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” in [0084], the language “listen for a full beacon or through probe request” is referencing the actions that are performed by the STA in response to receiving a short beacon indicating change. This is seen two lines up in [0084], reciting “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.” As indicated previously, the AP does not add change information or indicate change information with a probe request.
The argument that “a change count or a change indicator of a short beacon” teaches “indicates a version of the short beacon” is partly true. Examiner understands that there is an element in the short beacon, such as a change count or change indicator that indicates a version of the short beacon. However, the issue at point is that such an indicator only supported in the specification for a short beacon, and not supported in the specification to be indicated by a probe request.
There is no evidence in the specification that shows the probe request, sent by the STA, indicates a version of the short beacon. As indicated in the previous office action, [0062], [0068]- [[0072], [0076], [0084]-[0085], all provide disclosure for a change count or change indicator of a short beacon sent by an AP. However, none of the quoted paragraphs mention the probe request including the element that indicates a version of the short beacon OR the probe request indicating a version of the short beacon.
Applicant further recites [0126]-[0127] of the published application in their arguments to further show examples of “indication of transmission or presences of a short beacon”.
For reference, the entirety of [0126]-[0127] is recited:
[0126] According to the following embodiment, a primary beacon may be modified to support a short beacon feature. Specifically the primary beacon needs to carry short beacon related information. An example illustration of such a modified primary beacon 1200 is shown is FIG. 12. STAs receiving the modified primary beacon 1200 may read the short beacon related information field(s) 1201 in the modified primary beacon 1200 to determine how to receive the short beacon. Such information may include one or more of an indication of transmission or presence of a short beacon 1202, a short beacon transmission time information 1203 (e.g., in the form of absolute time, time offset from the primary beacon etc), periodicity of the short beacon (how frequently it is transmitted) 1204, an indication of transmission or presence of STBC mode and non-STBC modes of the short beacon 1205, an indication of transmission or presence of short beacon in bandwidth mode 1 MHz 1206, and an indication of transmission or presence of a short beacon in bandwidth mode 2 MHz 1207. While bandwidth modes for 1 MHz and 2 MHz are shown in this example, other bandwidth mode values may be alternatively implemented.
[0127] The short beacon related information may be included in any part of the primary beacon frame. In one embodiment it may be included in a newly created short beacon information element to be carried in the primary beacon. The short beacon related information may be included as part of an Operation element of the primary beacon where the Operation element is used by the AP to control the operation of STAs in the BSS. In this case the STAs receive the short beacon information by interpreting the Operation element in the received primary beacon. The primary beacon may be transmitted by an AP, (or STA in IBSS mode), in non-STBC mode and also in an STBC mode.
As shown above, Applicants reference to the disclosure defining “an indication of transmission or pretense of a short beacon” in [0126], is directed to a modified primary beacon carrying short beacon related information. Such disclosure is not directed or provides support for the claim language “the probe request indicates a version of the short beacon”.
As such, Examiner maintains that the amendments and applicants arguments do not overcome the 112 rejection for claims 1 and 13 and corresponding dependent claims.
Examiner further notes that independent claims 5 and 21 are not amended. Furthermore, applicant does not provide any additional responses to the claim language “the probe request includes the element that indicates a version of the short beacon”. As such, examiner maintains the previous 112 rejection indicated in the previous office action.
Applicant further argues on pages 12-13 of applicants remarks:
Applicant respectfully submits that under Hytera Communs. Co. V. Motorola Sols., Inc., 841 Fed. Appx. 210 (Fed. Cir. 2021) both steps must be taught in the art. Applicant respectfully submits that the present Office Action misapplies the USPTO own principles. Applicant respectfully submits that based on the element indicating that the short beacon has changed from a known version of the short beacon: sending a probe request, wherein the probe request indicates a version of the short beacon; receiving a probe response based on the prove request, and communicating on the medium according to the received probe response is not taught in the cited art. For at least this reason, Applicant respectfully submits that claim 1 is patentable.
Examiner notes that the claim amendments filed on Nov. 25, 2025, is shown below:
PNG
media_image2.png
469
828
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Examiner notes that based on case law recited above, the applicant is indicating that changing “if” to “based on” changes the scope of invention such that both steps are required, both steps are NOT conditional, and both steps must be taught. As such, since both claim limitations beginning with “based on” are required and the examiner is unable to produce a rejection based on prior art for all the limitations as required, the rejection based on prior art is withdrawn.
Examiner notes that independent method claim 21, is still written with conditional claim language. Specifically claim 21 recites:
21. (Previously Presented) A method implemented by a station (STA) in a wireless local area network, the method comprising:
receiving a short beacon frame comprising an element that indicates a current version of the short beacon frame, wherein the version of the short beacon frame is incremented when the contents of the short beacon are changed, wherein the short beacon frame includes less information than a beacon frame;
on a condition that the current version of the short beacon frame equals a known version of the short beacon frame: communicating on a wireless medium; and
on a condition that the current version of the short beacon frame does not equal a known version of the short beacon frame sending a probe request to obtain information associated with the current version of the short beacon frame, wherein the probe request includes the element that indicates a version of the short beacon, and communicating on the medium according to the sent probe request.
MPEP 2111.04, “Contingent Limitations” recites:
The broadest reasonable interpretation of a method (or process) claim having contingent limitations requires only those steps that must be performed and does not include steps that are not required to be performed because the condition(s) precedent are not met. For example, assume a method claim requires step A if a first condition happens and step B if a second condition happens. If the claimed invention may be practiced without either the first or second condition happening, then neither step A or B is required by the broadest reasonable interpretation of the claim. If the claimed invention requires the first condition to occur, then the broadest reasonable interpretation of the claim requires step A. If the claimed invention requires both the first and second conditions to occur, then the broadest reasonable interpretation of the claim requires both steps A and B.
As shown above, Claim 21 is a method claim requiring step A (i.e. communicating on a wireless medium) if a first condition happens (i.e. current version equals a known version) and step B (i.e. sending a probe request) if a second condition happens (i.e. current version does not equal a known version). Since the element cannot be both a known version and an unknown version, both steps are not required to be performed. Since the steps are performed upon a condition occurring, and different steps are performed for different conditions occurring, there is no requirement that both conditions occur.
As such, examiner maintains the rejection of claim 21, and corresponding dependent claims.
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 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.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 103(a) which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
(a) A patent may not be obtained though the invention is not identically disclosed or described as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the subject matter sought to be patented and the prior art are such that the subject matter as a whole would have been obvious at the time the invention was made to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which said subject matter 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 pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 103(a) 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.
Claims 18, 19, 21 is/are rejected under pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 103(a) as being unpatentable over US 2012/0314696 A1 (support found in provisional application no. 61/588,852, filed on Jan. 20, 2012 and provisional application no. 61/494,609, filed on Jun. 8, 2011) to Liu (hereinafter “Liu”) in view of US 2013/0177001 A1 (provisional application no. 61/596,775, filed on Feb. 9, 2012) to Abraham et al. (hereinafter “Abraham”)
Regarding Claim 21, Liu teaches A method implemented by a station (STA) in a wireless local area network, the method comprising: (Figure 1 and [0085], illustrates client stations 25)
receiving a short beacon frame comprising an element that indicates a current version of the short beacon frame, wherein the short beacon frame includes less information than a beacon frame; ([0154], discloses when a station is in a PS mode, the station wakes up periodically to listen for beacon frames and/or frames including a traffic indication map (TIM) to determine whether another station (e.g., the AP 14) has data buffered for the station. [0021], [0025], and [0178], discloses a network interface of a station (e.g., the AP 14), generates beacons having less information (i.e. short beacon) as compared to the beacons described in the current IEEE 802.11 Standard, for example. 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. [0195]-[0197], discloses a shortened beacon frame comprising a change sequence field 720 (which indicates whether BSS information has changed and thus whether the station should process other fields of the beacon frame 700 to determine what BSS information has changed)
on a condition that the current version of the short beacon frame equals a known version of the short beacon frame: communicating on a wireless medium; and (Examiner notes that the claim language is written as a contingent limitation. MPEP 2111.04 recites “The broadest reasonable interpretation of a method (or process) claim having contingent limitations requires only those steps that must be performed and does not include steps that are not required to be performed because the condition(s) precedent are not met’. Since the method can be performed in which a condition, in which the beacon has not changed, can occur, the action of sending a probe request is not required to perform the invention. [0154], discloses when a station is in a PS mode, the station wakes up periodically to listen for beacon frames and/or frames including a traffic indication map (TIM) to determine whether another station (e.g., the AP 14) has data buffered for the station. Examiner notes that an AP transmitting buffered units to the station is indicative of the station accessing the medium. [0178], discloses 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. Examiner notes that a probe request is only triggered when the field within the beacon indicates that BSS IEs have changed)
Liu teaches a short beacon comprising a change sequence field for indicating change in the short beacon, but does not explicitly teach the element having been incremented when the contents of the short beacon have changed.
However, the concept of incrementing a change sequence field for indicating change of a short beacon is well known in the art. For example, in a similar field of endeavor, Abraham discloses in [0071] and [0075], a low-overhead beacon frame 400, also referred to as a short beacon. Comprising a change sequence field 440. [0096], discloses In the illustrated embodiment of FIG. 4, the change sequence field 440 can serve to provide a sequence number indicative of a change in network information. In the illustrated embodiment, the change sequence field 440 serves keep track of changes to the AP 104. In an embodiment, the AP 104 may increment the change sequence field 440 when one or more parameters of the AP 104 change.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to modify the teachings of Liu to include the above limitations as suggested by Abraham, thereby reducing the overhead in transmitting beacon signals, thus allowing for more efficient communication of data as indicated in [0008]-[0009] of Abraham.
Liu teaches a short beacon comprising a change sequence field for indicating change in the short beacon, but does not explicitly teach the element having been incremented when the contents of the short beacon changed.
However, the concept of incrementing a change sequence field for indicating change of a short beacon is well known in the art. For example, in a similar field of endeavor, Abraham discloses in [0071] and [0075], a low-overhead beacon frame 400, also referred to as a short beacon. Comprising a change sequence field 440. [0096], discloses In the illustrated embodiment of FIG. 4, the change sequence field 440 can serve to provide a sequence number indicative of a change in network information. In the illustrated embodiment, the change sequence field 440 serves keep track of changes to the AP 104. In an embodiment, the AP 104 may increment the change sequence field 440 when one or more parameters of the AP 104 change.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to modify the teachings of Liu to include the above limitations as suggested by Abraham, thereby reducing the overhead in transmitting beacon signals, thus allowing for more efficient communication of data as indicated in [0008]-[0009] of Abraham.
Regarding Claim 18, Liu/Abraham teaches The method of claim 21, wherein Liu further teaches the element value comprising a version number information field. ([0196]-[0197], discloses change sequence field)
Regarding Claim 19, Liu/Abraham teaches The method of claim 21, wherein Liu further teaches the version number information field comprises at least one of a Common Advertisement Group (CAG) number or an AP Configuration Sequence Number (AP-CSN). ([0196]-[0197], discloses change sequence field (which indicates whether BSS information has changed (i.e. AP configuration sequence number))
Claims 20 is/are rejected under pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 103(a) as being unpatentable over Liu/Abraham in view of “A Partial TGu Proposal on Optimization of Delivery of Network Discovery Information through Layered Beacons” – IEEE 802.11-06/0286r1 to Faccin et al. (hereinafter “Faccin”)
Regarding Claim 20, Liu/Abraham teaches The method of claim 21, further comprising:
Liu/Abraham does not explicitly teach defining a plurality of beacons according to a multiple level beacon scheme in which each beacon level has a different transmission periodicity according to system configuration parameters, wherein content in each defined multiple level beacon is at least one of having partial overlap, having no overlap, or being forward inclusive.
However, in a similar field of endeavor, Faccin discloses in Section 2.2, a layered beacons (i.e. multiple level beacon scheme) proposal introducing two types of beacon frames (i.e. plurality of beacons) including a Network Maintenance Beacon (NMB) and a Network Discovery beacon (NDB). A first type of beacon frame, called Network Maintenance Beacon (NMB), is shorter and content is the same as in the legacy beacon frame, with the addition of a new Layered Beacons IE. The second type of beacon frame, called Network Discovery Beacon (NDB), is longer than NMB and includes legacy beacon information (i.e. having partial overlap with NMB). and necessary information for the discovering STAs (i.e., NDB=NMB+discovery information). Furthermore it is proposed that NMB and NDB are sent using self-adjusting time intervals depending on the system load. The basic interval is legacy beacon interval. The following rules apply (i.e. different transmission periodicity defined according to system configuration parameters):
- Light load: NDB sent in every TBTT
- Medium load: every n:th beacon is NDB, otherwise NMB is sent
- High load: NMB sent in every TBTT. NDB not sent at all.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to modify the teachings of Liu to include the above limitations as suggested by Liu/Abraham for optimizing the delivery of network discovery information through layered beacons as indicated in Section 2.2 of Faccin.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
US 2013/0177001 A1 to Abraham et al., directed to a station detecting a change in a change sequence in a received compressed beacon, and sending a probe request to the AP for updated configuration information.
JP 2007013649A to Miyata et al., directed to a terminal sending a beacon or probe request to other terminals indicating version information of shared information held at the terminal, where a terminal with newer version information will respond with updated shared information.
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
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