DETAILED ACTION
This Final Office Action is in response to application number 17/922,949 filed on November 2nd,2022. The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Applicant’s amendment filed 01/16/2026 is acknowledged
Claims 1,11,12,14,17,24,27,45,51 and 52 have been amended
Priority
Acknowledgment is made of applicant’s claim for foreign priority under 35 U.S.C. 119 (a)-(d). The certified copy has been filed on November 2nd,2022.
Information Disclosure Statements
The information disclosure statements (IDS), submitted on January 16th 2026, August 22nd, 2025, November 20th, 2024, November 9th, 2023, June 7th, 2023 and November 2nd, 2022 are in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statements are being considered by the examiner.
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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 January 16th, 2026, has been entered.
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 may not be obtained though the invention is not identically disclosed or described as set forth in section 102 of this title, 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 negatived by the manner in which the invention was made.
Claims 1,2,4,7-10,18,20,21,24,48,50 and 56 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103(a) as being unpatentable over Cariou (WO2019027493 A1) in view of Seok (US 20150341880 A1) further in view of Chu (US 10939476 B1).
Regarding claims 1 and 24, Cariou discloses a first wireless communication device, comprising: one or more transceivers; one or more memories that store processor-executable code; and one or more processors: configured to execute the processor-executable code and cause the first wireless communication device to: (Cariou FIG.2 and paragraphs 0035 0036 0044 0045 disclose transceivers, memories and processors in an AP or STA); receive a broadcast management frame from a second wireless communication device via the one or more transceivers, wherein the broadcast management frame comprises a first set of target wait time (TWT) parameters for a first TWT schedule, wherein the first set of TWT parameters indicates, for a service period, at least one of: a start time of the service period, a duration of the service period, a periodicity of the service period, or any combination thereof; (Cariou Paragraph 0128 discloses “In some embodiments, the control signaling may be transmitted as part of a negotiation between the AP 102 and the STA 103 for an establishment of a plurality of TWT SPs in a plurality of beacon intervals. The control signaling may indicate a duration of the TWT SPs, a start time of the TWT SPs, a periodicity of the TWT SPs and/or other information.”);
Cariou fails to explicitly disclose transmitting information to the second wireless communication device via the one or more transceivers during a transmission opportunity (TXOP)
However, in an analogous art, Seok teaches transmitting information to the second wireless communication device via the one or more transceivers during a transmission opportunity (TXOP), the TXOP having a maximum length, the TXOP further being, defined to not cross a service period boundary associated with the service period and indicated by the first set TWT of parameters ( Paragraph 0177 disclose “TXOP is defined as a time interval during which a specific STA has authority to initiate frame exchange on WM, and may be established by a start time and a maximum duration value.” Paragraph 0176 discloses through bullet item 2 that “TXOP (Transmission Opportunity) or transmission within a TXOP shall not extend across a target awake time.” Furthermore paragraph 0180 discloses “The above-mentioned item (2) may indicate that any transmission/reception (Tx/Rx) of STA is not allowed at the target awake time (TAT). For example, assuming that TXOP is in progress, the corresponding TXOP may be configured to stop before the target awake time (TAT). In other words, TXOP may be configured not to overlap with the target awake time (TAT). In addition, assuming that the target awake time (TAT) indicates a boundary of time slots to be described later, TXOP may not cross the boundary of the time slots.” The Target Awake Time (TAT) is disclosed by paragraph 0175, “The target awake time (TAT) may indicate a specific value that is allocated and transmitted to STA (s) by the AP. In more detail, the target awake time (TAT) may indicate a specific time at which STA(s) operated in the PS mode are switched from the doze state to the awake state.”).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to have modified Cariou to incorporate the teachings of Seok., to implement TXOP having a maximum length and further being, defined to not cross at least one service period boundary, in order to save power reliably and to control latency.
Cariou and Seok fail to explicitly disclose suspending a backoff counter during the service period.
However, in an analogous art, Chu et al. teaches suspending a backoff counter during the service period (US 10939476 B1 Paragraph 99 discloses “FIG.8 is an example timing diagram for a WLAN communication device configured to suspend a backoff timer, in an embodiment. In an embodiment, the operating channel 802 corresponds to an operating channel of the AP 114, or of a basic service set (BSS) supported by the AP 114. In an embodiment, the operating channel 802 corresponds to an operating channel of a client station 154 (e.g., the client station 154-1).” Paragraph 113 discloses “ In an embodiment, for example, the AP 114 suspends the backoff timer 836 without utilizing the component channel Ch3 (FIG. 8).” Whereby paragraph 83 discloses “In some embodiments, the AP 114 provides an implicit indication of the change in the primary channel to one or more client stations. In an embodiment, for example, the primary channel (e.g., one of the first primary channel 412 or the second primary channel 472) corresponds to a particular predetermined time period. In various embodiments, the predetermined time period is a service period, for example, a target wake time (TWT) service period.”)
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to have modified Cariou and Seok to incorporate the teachings of Chu et al., to implement suspending a backoff counter during the service period, in order to prioritize efficiency.
Regarding claims 2 and 48 Cariou discloses the first wireless communication device of claim 1, wherein the first TWT schedule associated with a service period restriction (Cariou Paragraph 00105-00106discloses “In some embodiments, the control signaling may be received as part of a unilateral indication, by the AP 102, of a plurality of TWT SPs in a plurality of beacon intervals. The control signaling may indicate a duration of the TWT SPs, a start time of the TWT SPs, a periodicity of the TWT SPs and/or other information. [00106] In some embodiments, the control signaling may indicate one or more of: a restriction for transmission outside of the TWT SP during the beacon interval; and a restriction for transmission inside of the TWT SP during the beacon interval. In a non-limiting example, such information may be included in a TWT flow identifier field. Other elements may be used, in some embodiments.”).
Regarding claims 4 and 50, Cariou discloses the first wireless communication device of claim 1, wherein the first set of TWT parameters specifies, for at least one service period, at least one type of traffic associated with high priority traffic, time sensitive traffic, or any combination thereof (Cariou Paragraph 00146 discloses when the station can use EDCA with in the TWT SP. Whereby EDCA is QoS the prioritization of traffic based on sensitivity to time).
Regarding claim 7, Cariou discloses the first wireless communication device of claim 1, wherein: the broadcast management frame further comprises a second set of TWT parameters for a second TWT schedule; and the one or more processors are further configured to execute the processor-executable code and cause the first wireless communication device to select the second TWT schedule for a communication with the second wireless communication device based on at least one of the first set of TWT parameters for the first TWT schedule or the second set of TWT parameters for the second TWT schedule (Cariou Paragraph 0158 and 0160 disclose the first and second set of TWT SPs and their related parameters respectively).
Regarding claim 8, Cariou discloses the first wireless communication device of claim 1, wherein the one or more processors are further configured to execute the processor-executable code and cause the first wireless communication device to: transmit, to the second wireless communication device via the one or more transceivers, a request to create a second TWT schedule for a communication with the second wireless communication device (Cariou Paragraph 00145 discloses creation of a second communication schedule in response to a request to the AP).
Regarding claim 9, Cariou discloses the first wireless communication device of claim 1, wherein the one or more processors are further configured to execute the processor-executable code and cause the first wireless communication device to: transmit, to the second wireless communication device via the one or more transceivers, a request to modify the first schedule or a second TWT schedule (Cariou Paragraph 00145 discloses modification of a communication schedule in response to a request to the AP).
Regarding claim 10, Cariou discloses the first wireless communication device of claim 1, wherein: the first set of TWT parameters defines the service period; and the one or more processors are further configured to execute the processor-executable code and cause the first wireless communication device perform at least one of: determine a time to transmit during the service period, determine a frequency resource to use during the service period, determine a spatial resource to use during the service period, or any combination thereof (Cariou Paragraph 0103 discloses the start time of the TWT SP this may correspond to the time to transmit. Additionally paragraph 00116 discloses TXOP a time duration when the station can transmit).
Regarding claim 18, Cariou discloses the first wireless communication device of claim 1, wherein: the broadcast management frame comprises an information element (IE) that includes the first set of TWT parameters for the first TWT schedule; and the first (TWT) schedule associated with a service period restriction (Cariou Paragraph 0105 discloses restrictions associated with the TWT schedule).
Regarding claim 20, Cariou discloses the first wireless communication device of claim 18, wherein the IE further comprises a second set of TWT parameters for a TWT schedule that is not associated with the service period restriction (Cariou Paragraph 0158 and 0160 disclose the first and second set of TWT SPs and their related parameters respectively).
Regarding claim 21, Cariou discloses the first wireless communication device of claim 20, wherein the one or more processors are further configured to execute the processor-executable code and cause the first wireless communication device to: select based on the second set TWT of parameters for the TWT schedule that is not associated with the service period restriction (Cariou Paragraph 0160 discloses the second set of parameters duration, start time and periodicity).
Regarding claim 56, Cariou discloses the first wireless communication device of claim 1.
Cariou fails to explicitly disclose, wherein the one or more processors are further configured to execute the processor-executable code and cause the first wireless communication device to: determine the maximum length of the TXOP.
However in an analogous art, Seok teaches wherein the one or more processors are further configured to execute the processor-executable code and cause the first wireless communication device to: determine the maximum length of the TXOP ( Paragraph 0177 disclose “TXOP is defined as a time interval during which a specific STA has authority to initiate frame exchange on WM, and may be established by a start time and a maximum duration value.”).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to have modified Cariou to incorporate the teachings of Seok., to implement TXOP having a maximum length and further being, defined to not cross at least one service period boundary, in order to enforce fairness and control latency for all users and traffic types.
Claim 5 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103(a) as being unpatentable over Cariou (WO2019027493 A1) in view of Seok (US20150341880 A1) further in view of Chu (US 10939476 B1) further in view Cariou-2 (WO2018080602 A1).
Regarding claim 5, Cariou, Seok and Chu discloses the first wireless communication device of claim 1. wherein the broadcast management frame comprises a beacon, a traffic indication map (TIM) broadcast frame, a fast initial link setup (FILS) discovery frame, or an opportunistic power save (OPS) frame.
Cariou, Seok and Chu fails to explicitly disclose wherein the broadcast management frame comprises a beacon, a traffic indication map (TIM) broadcast frame, a fast initial link setup (FILS) discovery frame, or an opportunistic power save (OPS) frame.
However, in an analogous art, Caariou-2 teaches wherein the broadcast management frame comprises a beacon, a traffic indication map (TIM) broadcast frame, a fast initial link setup (FILS) discovery frame, or an opportunistic power save (OPS) frame (Paragraphs 0071, 0076 and 0077 disclose the beacon, TIM, FILS and OPS)
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to have modified Cariou, Seok and Chu to incorporate the teachings of Cariou-2., to implement the following: beacon, TIM, FILS and OPS, in order to optimize network performance, efficiency and the end user experience.
Claims 11, 14,17 and 51, are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103(a) as being unpatentable over Cariou (WO2019027493 A1) in view of Seok (US20150341880 A1) further in view of Chu (US 10939476 B1) further in view of Park et al. (20180192444 A1).
Regarding claims 11 and 51 Cariou, Seok and Chu discloses the first wireless communication device of claim 1.
Cariou, Seok and Chu fail to explicitly disclose wherein the one or more processors are further configured to execute the processor-executable code and cause the first wireless communication device to: obtain a first TXOP having a duration based on the service period boundary (Paragraph 0131 disclose and defines the TXOP limit value).
However, in an analogous art, Park et al. teaches wherein the one or more processors and the one or more memories are further configured to: obtain a first TXOP having a duration based on the service period boundary (Paragraph 0131 disclose and defines the TXOP limit value a limitation on the transmission duration).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to have modified Cariou, Seok and Chu to incorporate the teachings of Park et al., to implement to implement limitations in the transmission duration, in order to maintain a balanced and efficient WLAN environment.
Regarding claim 14, Cariou, Seok and Chu discloses the first wireless communication device of claim 1.
Cariou, Seok and Chu fail to explicitly disclose wherein the one or more processors are further configured to execute the processor-executable code and cause the first wireless communication device to: receive, from the second wireless communication device via the one or more transceivers, an indication that the TXOP has been truncated based on the service period boundary.
However, in an analogous art, Park et al. teaches wherein the one or more processors are further configured to execute the processor-executable code and cause the first wireless communication device to: receive, from the second wireless communication device via the one or more transceivers, an indication that the TXOP has been truncated based on the service period boundary. (Paragraph 0131 disclose and defines the TXOP limit value).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to have modified Cariou, Seok and Chu to incorporate the teachings of Park et al., to implement TXOP duration truncation functionality, in order to promote fairness, reduce latency and enhance network efficiency in the WLAN environment.
Regarding claim 17, Cariou, Seok and Chu discloses the first wireless communication device of claim 1.
Cariou, Seok and Chu fails to explicitly disclose wherein the one or more processors are further configured to execute the processor-executable code and cause the first wireless communication device to: reset a medium access counter at the service period boundary.
However, in an analogous art, Park et al. teaches wherein the one or more processors and the one or more memories are further configured to: reset a medium access counter at the at least one service period boundary (Paragraphs 0241 and 0261 disclose resetting medium access counter).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to have modified Cariou, Seok and Chu to incorporate the teachings of Park et al., to reset a medium access counter, in order to prevent collisions thus reducing latency and maintaining optimal performance for the end user.
Claims 12 and 52 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103(a) as being unpatentable over Cariou (WO2019027493 A1) in view of Seok (US20150341880 A1) further in view of Chu (US 10939476 B1) further in view of Sanjiv et al. (CN 102612076 B Translation used).
Regarding claims 12 and 52, Cariou, Seok and Chu discloses the first wireless communication device of claim 1.
Cariou, Seok and Chu fails to explicitly disclose wherein the one or more processors are further configured to execute the processor-executable code and cause the first wireless communication device to: obtain a first TXOP having a first duration; truncate the first duration of the first TXOP based on the service period boundary; and transmit a message to indicate that the first duration of the first TXOP has been truncated.
However, in an analogous art, Sanjiv et al. teaches wherein the one or more processors are further configured to execute the processor-executable code and cause the first wireless communication device to: obtain a first TXOP having a first duration; truncate the first duration of the first TXOP based on the service period boundary; (Page 65 Paragraph 4 discloses “In this embodiment, MIMO STAs follow a SCAP boundary. at last one STA to transmit in the SCAP must terminate its TXO duration before ending of at least PIFS SCAP. MIMO STAs also obey the TXOP boundary of scheduling, and finish its transmission before the assigned TXOP ending. Thus, the subsequent scheduled STA without detection channel can start its TXOP at idle condition.”) and transmit a message to indicate that the first duration of the first TXOP has been truncated (Page 15 Paragraph 2 discloses “In the embodiment, when the transmission 510 is terminate when a SIFS after the transmission 510 followed by ACK 520. ”).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to have modified Cariou, Seok and Chu to incorporate the teachings of Sanjiv et al., to implement TXOP duration truncation functionality followed by an acknowledgement , in order to promote fairness, reduce latency and enhance network efficiency in the WLAN environment.
Claims 27,28,30,45,53 and 55 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103(a) as being unpatentable over Cariou (WO2019027493 A1) in view of Sanjiv et al. (CN 102612076 B Translation Used).
Regarding claim ,27 and 45 Cariou discloses a first wireless communication device, comprising: one or more transceivers; one or more memories configured to store processor-executable code; and one or more processors configured to execute the processor-executable code and cause the first wireless communication device to: (Cariou FIG.2 and paragraphs 0035 0036 0044 0045 disclose transceivers, memories and processors in an AP or STA); transmit a broadcast management frame via the one or more transceivers, wherein the broadcast management frame comprises a first set of target wait time (TWT) parameters for a first TWT schedule, wherein the first set of TWT parameters indicates, for a service period, at least one of: a start time of the service period, a duration of the service period, a periodicity of the service period, or any combination thereof; (Cariou Paragraph 0128 discloses “In some embodiments, the control signaling may be transmitted as part of a negotiation between the AP 102 and the STA 103 for an establishment of a plurality of TWT SPs in a plurality of beacon intervals. The control signaling may indicate a duration of the TWT SPs, a start time of the TWT SPs, a periodicity of the TWT SPs and/or other information.”);
Cariou fails to explicitly disclose receiving information from the second wireless communication device via the one or more transceivers during a transmission opportunity (TXOP), the TXOP having a maximum length, the TXOP further being truncated at a service period boundary indicated by the first set of TWT parameters.
However, in an analogous art, Sanjiv et al. teaches receiving information from the second wireless communication device via the one or more transceivers during a transmission opportunity (TXOP), the TXOP having a maximum length, the TXOP further being truncated at a service period boundary indicated by the first set of TWT parameters. (Page 17 Paragraph 4 discloses TX/RX during the TXOP and the maximum length, “In order to improve the MAC efficiency, when the STA by EDCA or through polling type obtains the medium access in HCCA, STA can transmit more than one frame. The one or more frames is referred to as a TXOP. on the media, the maximum length of a TXOP depends on service type and determined by the AP. Furthermore, for polling by the TXOP, AP indicates TXOP grant duration. during the TXOP, the STA can transmit a series of frames, interspersed with SIFS and ACK from the destination party. except without waiting for DIFS plus backoff time for each frame, gains a TXOP of the STA can know, it can occupy the channel for subsequent transmissions.” Page 65 Paragraph 4 discloses “In this embodiment, MIMO STAs follow a SCAP boundary. at last one STA to transmit in the SCAP must terminate its TXO duration before ending of at least PIFS SCAP. MIMO STAs also obey the TXOP boundary of scheduling, and finish its transmission before the assigned TXOP ending. Thus, the subsequent scheduled STA without detection channel can start its TXOP at idle condition.”).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to have modified Cariou to incorporate the teachings of Sanjiv et al., to implement TXOP having a maximum length and further to truncate TXOP before service period boundary, in order to save power and ensure efficiency and predictability .
Regarding claims 28 and 53 Cariou discloses the first wireless communication device of claim 27,wherein the first TWT schedule is associated with a service period restriction (Cariou Paragraph 00105-00106 disclose “In some embodiments, the control signaling may be received as part of a unilateral indication, by the AP 102, of a plurality of TWT SPs in a plurality of beacon intervals. The control signaling may indicate a duration of the TWT SPs, a start time of the TWT SPs, a periodicity of the TWT SPs and/or other information. In some embodiments, the control signaling may indicate one or more of: a restriction for transmission outside of the TWT SP during the beacon interval; and a restriction for transmission inside of the TWT SP during the beacon interval. In a non-limiting example, such information may be included in a TWT flow identifier field. Other elements may be used, in some embodiments.”).
Regarding claims 30 and 55, Cariou discloses the first wireless communication device of claim 27, wherein the first set of TWT parameters specifies, for at least one service period, at least one type of traffic associated with high priority traffic, time sensitive traffic, or any combination thereof (Cariou Paragraph 00146 discloses when the station can use EDCA with in the TWT SP. Whereby EDCA is QoS the prioritization of traffic based on sensitivity to time).
Response to Augments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claims 1, 12, 24,27 and 45 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
With regards to claim 2 applicant in the arguments indicates that cited paragraphs do not appear to disclose that “the first TWT schedule is associated with a service period restriction.”). Examiner respectfully disagrees as Cariou paragraph 00105-00106 disclose, “In some embodiments, the control signaling may be received as part of a unilateral indication, by the AP 102, of a plurality of TWT SPs in a plurality of beacon intervals. The control signaling may indicate a duration of the TWT SPs, a start time of the TWT SPs, a periodicity of the TWT SPs and/or other information. In some embodiments, the control signaling may indicate one or more of: a restriction for transmission outside of the TWT SP during the beacon interval; and a restriction for transmission inside of the TWT SP during the beacon interval. In a non-limiting example, such information may be included in a TWT flow identifier field. Other elements may be used, in some embodiments.”).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Samuel Dilan Rutnam whose telephone number is 703-756-1374. The examiner can normally be reached between 8:30am-5:00pm Mon-Fri.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Sujoy Kundu can be reached on 571-272-8586.
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).
/Samuel Dilan Rutnam/
Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2471
/MOHAMMAD S ADHAMI/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2471