DETAILED ACTION
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 .
Response to Arguments
Regarding First Argument:
Applicant argues in substance that the combination of prior arts as applied to claims 1 and 10 do not apply to the claimed invention. Applicant has amended claims 1 and 10 with elements of now cancelled claims 2 and 11 in an attempt to overcome the rejection.
Examiner disagrees with the assertion of the applicant. As applicant points out in their argument Fodor teaches in a first time slot an RTS may be sent by a station to an AP and in subsequent time slots a CTS may be sent. This represents a series of time slots. When added to the combination of Badic and Nishikawa, the disclosure of Fodor teaches the claimed invention. One of ordinary skill of the art would see this connection and therefore the rejection is proper and thus, has been maintained.
Regarding Second Argument:
Applicant argues in substance that newly introduced independent claim 19, containing elements of claim 1 and claim 5 overcomes the prior art rejection as applied to claim 5. Applicant argues that combination of Badic in view of Nishikawa and further in view of Yu as cited in previous rejection of claim 5 is improper and therefore claim 19 is allowable.
Examiner respectfully disagrees. Yu discloses an offset time applied to a nominal time. One of ordinary skill in the art would see that disclosure as an offset time as described in both claim 5 and claim 19. For at least these reasons, the rejection is proper and thus has been maintained on claim 5 and applied to claim 19.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
Claim(s) 1/10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Badic (US 10812125 B1) hereafter Badic in view of Nishikawa(US 20050089001 A1) hereafter Nishikawa and further in view of Fodor (US 20200914904 A1) hereafter Fodor.
Regarding claim 1:
Badic discloses:
A method in a communication system including an access point and a plurality of stations, the method comprising: selecting, at the access point, a quasi-omni-directional beam for use in transmitting and receiving (Badic 235Column 54 lines 15-38, access node selects best link quality beams can be quasi omni directional beam)
selecting, at each station, one of a plurality of directional beams for use in transmitting and receiving (Badic 235Column 54 lines 15-38, terminal node selects best link quality beams)
Badic fails to disclose:
pausing transmission of Request To Send (RTS) control frames responsive to detecting (i) a RTS control frame from the access point to any one of the stations, or (ii) a Clear to Send (CTS) control frame from the access point to any one of the stations; wherein pausing transmission of RTS control frames is for a duration of time provided in the detected RTS control frame or CTS frame, wherein a series of time slots are defined for the network, and wherein: each of the stations only transmit RTS control frames during a first set of the series of time slots, and the access point only transmits RTS control frames during a second set of the series of time slots.
Nishikawa discloses:
([¶0078]MAC (media access control) frame)([¶0078]MAC (media access control) frame)([¶0018] pausing transmission of RTS and CTS frames)
Badic and Nishikawa are analogous as they both pertain to the field of wireless communications. It would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify Badic with the teachings of Nishikawa for better control of the pausing of control frames in order to increase throughput of a wireless system.
Badic and Nishikawa do not disclose:
wherein a series of time slots are defined for the network, and wherein: each of the stations only transmit RTS control frames during a first set of the series of time slots, and the access point only transmits RTS control frames during a second set of the series of time slots.
Fodor discloses:
wherein a series of time slots are defined for the network, and wherein: each of the stations only transmit RTS control frames during a first set of the series of time slots, and the access point only transmits RTS control frames during a second set of the series of time slots. ([¶0006/0007] STA sends RTS to AP in first time slot, AP sends CTS in subsequent time slot)
Badic, Nishikawa, and Fodor are analogous as they both pertain to the field of wireless communications. It would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify Badic and Nishikawa with the teachings of Fodor to in include communication time slots in order to improve transmission in a wireless system.
Regarding Claim 10:
Badic discloses:
A network, comprising: an access point configured select a quasi-omni-directional beam for use in transmitting and receiving (Badic 235Column 54 lines 15-38, access node selects best link quality beams can be quasi omni directional beam)
And a plurality of stations, each station configured to select one of a plurality of directional beams for use in transmitting and receiving (Badic 235Column 54 lines 15-38, terminal node selects best link quality beams)
Badic fails to disclose:
pause transmission of Request To Send (RTS) control frames responsive to detecting (i) a RTS control frame from the access point to any one of the stations, or (ii) a Clear to Send (CTS) control frame from the access point to any one of the stations; wherein a series of time slots are defined for the network, and wherein: each of the stations only transmit RTS control frames during a first set of the series of time slots, and the access point only transmits RTS control frames during a second set of the series of time slots.
Nishikawa discloses:
pause transmission of Request To Send (RTS) control frames([¶0078]MAC (media access control) frame) ([¶0018] pausing transmission of RTS and CTS frames)
Badic and Nishikawa are analogous as they both pertain to the field of wireless communications. It would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify Badic with the teachings of Nishikawa for better control of the pausing of control frames in order to increase throughput of a wireless system.
Badic and Nishikawa do not disclose:
wherein a series of time slots are defined for the network, and wherein: each of the stations only transmit RTS control frames during a first set of the series of time slots, and the access point only transmits RTS control frames during a second set of the series of time slots.
Fodor discloses:
wherein a series of time slots are defined for the network, and wherein: each of the stations only transmit RTS control frames during a first set of the series of time slots, and the access point only transmits RTS control frames during a second set of the series of time slots. ([¶0006/0007] STA sends RTS to AP in first time slot, AP sends CTS in subsequent time slot)
Badic, Nishikawa, and Fodor are analogous as they both pertain to the field of wireless communications. It would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify Badic and Nishikawa with the teachings of Fodor to in include communication time slots in order to improve transmission in a wireless system.
Claim(s) 3/12 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Badic in view of Nishikawa and Fodor as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Shah (US 8401481 B1) hereafter Shah.
Regarding Claim 3:
Limitations of parent claims are taught by Badic in view of Nishikawa and Fodor
Badic, Nishikawa and Fodor fail to disclose:
wherein the first set of time slots are odd numbered time slots and the second set of time slots are even numbered time slots.
Shah discloses:
wherein the first set of time slots are odd numbered time slots and the second set of time slots are even numbered time slots. (Fig 2., Column 2, line 52-62 First set of odd time slots, second set of even time slots)
Badic, Nishikawa, Fodor, and Shah are analogous as they both pertain to the field of wireless communications. It would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify Badic, Nishikawa and Fodor with the teachings of Shah to further define communication time slots in order to improve transmission in a wireless system.
Claim 12 is rejected under the same grounds of rejection as claim 3.
Claim(s) 4-5/13-14 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Badic in view of Nishikawa and Fodor as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Yu (US 20200067565 A1) hereafter Yu.
Regarding Claim 4:
Limitations of parent claims are taught by Badic in view of Nishikawa and Fodor
Badic, Nishikawa and Fodor fail to disclose:
further comprising: applying a randomized start offset time to each of the plurality of stations such that each station transmits
Yu discloses:
further comprising: applying a randomized start offset time to each of the plurality of stations such that each station transmits ([¶0011] wireless communication device transmits offset time from a start time)
Badic, Nishikawa, Foror, and Yu are analogous as they both pertain to the field of wireless communications. It would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify Badic Nishikawa, and Fodor with the teachings of Yu to include time offsets in order to improve transmission in a wireless system.
Regarding Claim 5:
Limitations of parent claims are taught by Badic in view of Nishikawa and Fodor
Badic, Nishikawa and Fodor fail to disclose:
further comprising: applying a start time offset to each of the plurality of stations, wherein the start time offset corresponds to a defined air propagation time for each station.
Yu discloses:
further comprising: applying a start time offset to each of the plurality of stations, wherein the start time offset corresponds to a defined air propagation time for each station. ([¶0011] offset time from a start time of the nominal transmit time)
Badic, Nishikawa, Fodor and Yu are analogous as they both pertain to the field of wireless communications. It would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify Badic, Nishikawa, and Fodor with the teachings of Yu to further define time offsets in order to improve transmission in a wireless system.
Claims 13/14 are rejected under the same grounds of rejection as claim 4/5.
Claim(s) 6-8/15-17 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Badic in view of Nishikawa and Fodor as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Wentink (US 20200322996 A1) hereafter Wentink.
Regarding Claim 6:
Limitations of parent claims are taught by Badic in view of Nishikawa and Fodor
Badic discloses:
further comprising: sending, from the access point using the selected quasi-omni-directional beam (Column 54 lines 15-38, access node selects best link quality beams can be quasi omni directional beam),
Badic, Nishikawa and Fodor fail to disclose:
a Contention Free End (CFEnd) control frame to one of the stations when unused time remains in a period of time allotted for the access point to transmit data to the stations; and detecting, at the remaining stations, the CFEnd control frame.
Wentink discloses:
a Contention Free End (CFEnd) control frame to one of the stations when unused time remains in a period of time allotted for the access point to transmit data to the stations; and detecting, at the remaining stations, the CFEnd control frame.
(Wentink [¶ 0032] access points may truncate txop by transmitting CF-end frame[¶0040] CF-end is reveived by all stations)
Badic, Nishikawa, Fodor and Wentink are analogous as they both pertain to the field of wireless communications. It would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify Badic, Nishikawa, and Fodor with the teachings of Wentink to truncate transmission opportunities and increase efficiency in a wireless system.
Regarding Claim 7:
Limitations of parent claims are taught by Badic in view of Nishikawa and Fodor
Badic Discloses:
(Column 54 lines 15-38, access node selects best link quality beams can be quasi omni directional beam)
Badic, Nishikawa and Fodor fail to disclose:
further comprising: sending, from a first one of the stations following completion of a data exchange between the first station and the access point, a Contention Free End (CFEnd) control frame to the access point using the selected directional beam, the CFEnd control frame indicating time remaining until transmission medium is free for contention; and at the access point, relaying the CFEnd control frame
Wentink discloses:
further comprising: sending, from a first one of the stations following completion of a data exchange between the first station and the access point, a Contention Free End (CFEnd) control frame to the access point using the selected directional beam, the CFEnd control frame indicating time remaining until transmission medium is free for contention; and at the access point, relaying the CFEnd control frame (fig. 10,[¶0047],[¶0051] client sends CF-end frame with defined time, AP receives CF-end frame, AP sends CF-end frame)
Badic, Nishikawa, Fodor, and Wentink are analogous as they both pertain to the field of wireless communications. It would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify Badic, Nishikawa, and Fodor, with the teachings of Wentink to truncate transmission opportunities and increase efficiency in a wireless system.
Regarding Claim 8:
Limitations of parent claims are taught by Badic in view of Nishikawa and Fodor and further in view of Wentink.
Badic, Nishikawa and Fodor fail to disclose:
further comprising: at the access point, prior to relaying the CFEnd control frame, determining whether the unused time exceeds a threshold.
Wentink discloses:
further comprising: at the access point, prior to relaying the CFEnd control frame, determining whether the unused time exceeds a threshold. ( [¶0064] CF-end frame sent to AP after time interval, AP determines whether to send CF-end frame or to clear)
Badic, Nishikawa, Fodor, and Wentink are analogous as they both pertain to the field of wireless communications. It would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify Badic, Nishikawa, and Fodor, with the teachings of Wentink to truncate transmission opportunities and increase efficiency in a wireless system.
Claims 15-17 are rejected under the same grounds of rejection as claim 6-8.
Claim(s) 9/18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Badic in view of Nishikawa and Fodor as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Reial (US 20210360430 A1) hereafter Reial.
Regarding Claim 9:
Limitations of parent claims are taught by Badic in view of Nishikawa and Fodor
Badic, Nishikawa and Fodor fail to disclose:
further comprising: at each station, selecting the one of the plurality of directional beams by: obtaining a dwell time parameter; selecting a subset of the plurality of directional beams based on the dwell time parameter; and scanning each of the selected subset.
Reial discloses:
further comprising: at each station, selecting the one of the plurality of directional beams by: obtaining a dwell time parameter; selecting a subset of the plurality of directional beams based on the dwell time parameter; and scanning each of the selected subset. ([¶0054] selects from plurality of directional beams using dwell time and scanning selected subset)
Badic, Nishikawa, Fodor, and Reial are analogous as they both pertain to the field of wireless communications. It would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify Badic, Nishikawa, and Fodor with the teachings of Reial to obtain a dwell time parameter in order to better select a directional beam.
Claim 18 are rejected under the same grounds of rejection as claim 9.
Claim(s) 19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Badic in view of Nishikawa, and further in view of Yu (US 20200067565 A1) hereafter Yu.
Regarding Claim 19:
Badic discloses:
A method in a communication system including an access point and a plurality of stations, the method comprising: selecting, at the access point, a quasi-omni-directional beam for use in transmitting and receiving (Badic 235Column 54 lines 15-38, access node selects best link quality beams can be quasi omni directional beam)
selecting, at each station, one of a plurality of directional beams for use in transmitting and receiving (Badic 235Column 54 lines 15-38, terminal node selects best link quality beams)
Badic fails to disclose:
pausing transmission of Request To Send (RTS) control frames responsive to detecting (i) a RTS control frame from the access point to any one of the stations, or (ii) a Clear to Send (CTS) control frame from the access point to any one of the stations; and applying a start time offset to each of the plurality of stations, wherein the start time offset corresponds to a defined air propagation time for each station, wherein pausing transmission of RTS control frames is for a duration of time provided in the detected RTS control frame or CTS frame.
Nishikawa discloses:
([¶0078]MAC (media access control) frame)([¶0078]MAC (media access control) frame)(i) a RTS control frame from the access point to any one of the stations, or (ii) a Clear to Send (CTS) control frame from the access point to any one of the stations; ([¶0018] pausing transmission of RTS and CTS frames)
Badic and Nishikawa are analogous as they both pertain to the field of wireless communications. It would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify Badic with the teachings of Nishikawa for better control of the pausing of control frames in order to increase throughput of a wireless system.
Badic and Nishikawa fail to disclose:
applying a start time offset to each of the plurality of stations, wherein the start time offset corresponds to a defined air propagation time for each station.
Yu discloses:
applying a start time offset to each of the plurality of stations, wherein the start time offset corresponds to a defined air propagation time for each station. ([¶0011] offset time from a start time of the nominal transmit time)
Badic, Nishikawa, and Yu are analogous as they both pertain to the field of wireless communications. It would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify Badic and Nishikawa with the teachings of Yu to further define time offsets in order to improve transmission in a wireless system.
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. 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 HUGH MARK ASHLEY whose telephone number is (571)272-0199. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8-430.
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, Asad Nawaz can be reached at (571) 272-3988. 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.
/HUGH MARK ASHLEY/Examiner, Art Unit 2463
/ASAD M NAWAZ/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2463