DETAILED ACTION
Examiner acknowledges receipt of Applicant’s Request for Continued Examination (RCE) filed 8/13/2026 and entering amendments filed 7/15/2026.
In the RCE, Applicant amended claims 1, 10, 16, and 21 and cancelled claim 5.
Claims 1, 4, 7-10, 15, 16, 21, and 24-26 are currently pending.
Response to Arguments
Examiner has fully considered Applicant's arguments, see section II on page 8, filed 7/15/2026, with respect to the rejection of claim 21 under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) but they are not persuasive.
Applicant generally asserts that claim 21 has been amended “to address the rejection”. However, the amendment changes the label of the link set identifier from a “second” to a “fourth” link set identifier. Although this matches the modifier used in parts of the specification, it does not address the underlying issue in the rejection. Namely, the specification appears to include only support for the embodiment of Table 3 or the embodiment of Table 4 (see [0076] – “Different from Table 3, the doze information in Table 4 includes a fourth link set identifier…”). However, claim 21 requires the doze information in the message frame to include both link identifiers (of Table 3) and a link set identifier (Table 4). Therefore, the rejection of claim 21 under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) is maintained herein.
Examiner has fully considered Applicant's arguments, see pages 8-15, filed 7/15/2026, with respect to the rejections of the claims under 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 but they are moot because the new ground of rejection relies on the newly applied Kwon reference for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
On pages 8-9, Applicant recites claim 1. On pages 9-12, Applicant recites portions of the Kim reference and argues that Kim does not disclose the amended limitations that the wake-up information (including a wake-up identification bit and respective link identifiers) is carried in a MAC frame header portion of the first message frame. The rejection below uses the Kwon reference in place of the Kim reference. Kwon explicitly discloses that the MAC header carries an “indication if the non-AP MLD is in the Awake state or not on the other link(s)” and also indicates that in some cases this indication can be a link bitmap (identifying links and their corresponding Awake status). This is analogous to the bitmap structure of the wake-up information in Kim. Kim combined with Kwon renders claims 1 and 10 obvious.
On pages 13-15, Applicant presents arguments regarding claim 16. Kwon is similarly used to modify Liu and render claim 16 obvious as indicated in detail below.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112(a)
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.
Claim 21 is 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 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.
Regarding claim 21: the limitation “further comprises a fourth link set identifier” does not appear to be consistent with the original disclosure. The previous set of claims claimed the link identifier and the link set identifier in the alternative. Amended claim 21 requires the message to include both the link identifier and the link set identifier. However, the specification includes two separate tables (Table 3 and Table 4) to include separate embodiments for the doze information. As indicated in [0076], these appear to be alternative embodiments (“Different from Table 3, the doze information in Table 4 includes a fourth link set identifier corresponding to a link set… For example, Link1 and Link2 in FIG. 1 may be set as a set corresponding to the fourth link set identifier Link set 1 in Table 4, and Link3 in FIG. 1 may correspond to the fourth link set identifier Link set 2”). However, claim 21 requires both the link identifier (see claim 16) of the embodiment of Table 3 and the link set identifier of the embodiment of Table 4. The specification appears to include only support for the embodiment of Table 3 or the embodiment of Table 4 (see [0076] – “Different from Table 3, the doze information in Table 4 includes a fourth link set identifier…”). Therefore, the claims are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) as including new matter.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
Claims 1, 4, 7, 9, 10, and 24-26 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chitrakar et al (US 2023/0232276) in view of *Kwon et al (US 2021/0385692).
* Included in form PTO-892 mailed 5/19/2026
Regarding claim 1: Chitrakar discloses a method for communication on multiple links, performed by an access point, comprising:
determining a first message frame, wherein the first message frame comprises wake-up information for indicating a wake-up state of one or more links, and the wake-up information is configured to identify to wake up a corresponding link to receive a cached downlink data frame (disclosed throughout; see step 902 of Figure 9, for example, which discloses generating a frame; this frame comprises information to indicate to one or more non-AP MLDs that cached (buffered) downlink data is available and that the corresponding link should wake-up to receive the buffered data; this frame structure is illustrated further in Figure 10, which shows the link/TID/AC information 1006 for each multi-link device (MLD) that has buffered data; the link/TID/AC information indicates the wake-up state of one or more links for the corresponding MLD; as one example, consider Figure 12; as indicated in [0082], “a bit in a LMB corresponding to a MLD is set to 1 to indicate that the BUs are available in the corresponding link”; as indicated throughout, these bits are “used by the respective non-AP MLDs to determine which link(s) they should wake up to retrieve the buffered MPDUs from the AP MLD” (see [0064])), and the wake-up information comprises a wake-up identification bit (disclosed throughout; see Figure 12, the corresponding description paragraphs, and [0064], for example; as indicated in Figure 12, for example, each of these AIDs has a bit in the TIM bitmap (top row 1200 of Figure 12); in particular, consider the information directed to a particular multi-link device (such as MLD 2 with AID 28, for example); the TIM bit corresponding to AID 28 is “set to 1 indicating that the AP MLD has one or more buffered frame to transmit to the corresponding STA and MLDs respectively” and that it “should wake up” to “retrieve the buffered MPDUs from the AP MLD” as indicated in [0064]; thus, this bit for MLD 2/AID 28 is interpreted as a wake-up identification bit) and respective first link identifiers corresponding to the multiple links (disclosed throughout; see also Figure 12, the corresponding description paragraphs, and [0064] and [0082], for example; continuing with MLD 2/AID 28, the wake-up information further includes three bits, corresponding to links 1-3, respectively (see the first three bits in the bottom row 1204 of Figure 12); as indicated in [0082], “[a] bit in a LMB corresponding to a MLD is set to 1 to indicate that the BUs are available in the corresponding link”);
in response to a downlink data frame being cached on a link in a doze state, setting the wake-up identification bit to a first value, for indicating a presence of a link that needs to be woken up (disclosed throughout; the bits in the TIM bitmap and those in the LMB are wake-up indication bits as indicated in Figure 12; if a bit corresponding to the AID for a particular non-AP (STA) MLD is set to 1, this indicates that this particular non-AP MLD has data buffered; further, the LMB is used to indicated a particular link to wakeup; see [0082], which indicates “a bit in a LMB corresponding to a MLD is set to 1 to indicate that the BUs are available in the corresponding link”; as indicated throughout, these bits are “used by the respective non-AP MLDs to determine which link(s) they should wake up to retrieve the buffered MPDUs from the AP MLD” (see [0064]); thus, the bit identifies whether a particular link for a particular non-AP (STA) MLD should wake-up because buffered data is available);
setting an identifier corresponding to a link that needs to be woken up in the first link identifiers to a second value, for waking up the corresponding link (disclosed throughout; the bits in the TIM bitmap and those in the LMB are wake-up indication bits as indicated in Figure 12; if a bit corresponding to the AID for a particular non-AP (STA) MLD is set to 1, this indicates that this particular non-AP MLD has data buffered; further, the LMB is used to indicated a particular link to wakeup; see [0082], which indicates “a bit in a LMB corresponding to a MLD is set to 1 to indicate that the BUs are available in the corresponding link”; as indicated throughout, these bits are “used by the respective non-AP MLDs to determine which link(s) they should wake up to retrieve the buffered MPDUs from the AP MLD” (see [0064]); thus, the bit identifies whether a particular link for a particular non-AP (STA) MLD should wake-up because buffered data is available; similarly, the link-set values are set to indicate whether or not the corresponding link-set has buffered data and should wake up; see Figure 14 and the corresponding description); and
sending the first message frame to a station, for the station waking up the corresponding link based on the wake-up information (disclosed throughout; see step 904 of Figure 9, for example).
Chitrakar is silent regarding the limitations that the wake-up information is carried in a media access control (MAC) frame header portion of the first message frame. However, Kwon discloses in [0131] that an “indication if the non-AP MLD is in the Awake state or not on the other link(s) among a set of links is included in a MAC header part of the trigger frame”. Further, “the indication is a link bitmap, wherein each different bit in the link bitmap indicates if a link corresponding to the bit is in the Awake state or not”. That is, the indication is analogous to the bitmap structure of Chitrakar that includes the wake-up information. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify Chitrakar to include the wake-up information (including the bitmap structure) in the MAC header as suggested by Kwon. The rationale for doing so would have been to minimize the amount of decoding required to determine the wake-up state of the additional links.
Regarding claim 10: Chitrakar discloses a method for communication on multiple links, performed by a station, comprising:
receiving a first message frame, wherein the first message frame comprises wake-up information for indicating a wake-up state of one or more links, and the wake-up information is configured to identify to wake up a corresponding link to receive a cached downlink data frame (disclosed throughout; see step 902 of Figure 9, for example, which discloses generating a frame; this frame comprises information to indicate to one or more non-AP MLDs that cached (buffered) downlink data is available and that the corresponding link should wake-up to receive the buffered data; this frame structure is illustrated further in Figure 10, which shows the link/TID/AC information 1006 for each multi-link device (MLD) that has buffered data; the link/TID/AC information indicates the wake-up state of one or more links for the corresponding MLD; as one example, consider Figure 12; as indicated in [0082], “a bit in a LMB corresponding to a MLD is set to 1 to indicate that the BUs are available in the corresponding link”; as indicated throughout, these bits are “used by the respective non-AP MLDs to determine which link(s) they should wake up to retrieve the buffered MPDUs from the AP MLD” (see [0064]); as indicated in step 904 of Figure 9, this message frame is transmitted to the non-AP MLD; see also Figure 2 which shows an example of multi-link devices exchanging TIM frames), and the wake-up information comprises a wake-up identification bit (disclosed throughout; see Figure 12, the corresponding description paragraphs, and [0064], for example; as indicated in Figure 12, for example, each of these AIDs has a bit in the TIM bitmap (top row 1200 of Figure 12); in particular, consider the information directed to a particular multi-link device (such as MLD 2 with AID 28, for example); the TIM bit corresponding to AID 28 is “set to 1 indicating that the AP MLD has one or more buffered frame to transmit to the corresponding STA and MLDs respectively” and that it “should wake up” to “retrieve the buffered MPDUs from the AP MLD” as indicated in [0064]; thus, this bit for MLD 2/AID 28 is interpreted as a wake-up identification bit) and respective first link identifiers corresponding to the multiple links (disclosed throughout; see also Figure 12, the corresponding description paragraphs, and [0064] and [0082], for example; continuing with MLD 2/AID 28, the wake-up information further includes three bits, corresponding to links 1-3, respectively (see the first three bits in the bottom row 1204 of Figure 12); as indicated in [0082], “[a] bit in a LMB corresponding to a MLD is set to 1 to indicate that the BUs are available in the corresponding link”), in response to a downlink data frame being cached on a link in a doze state, the wake-up identification bit is set to a first value, for indicating a presence of a link that needs to be woken up (disclosed throughout; the bits in the TIM bitmap and those in the LMB are wake-up indication bits as indicated in Figure 12; if a bit corresponding to the AID for a particular non-AP (STA) MLD is set to 1, this indicates that this particular non-AP MLD has data buffered; further, the LMB is used to indicated a particular link to wakeup; see [0082], which indicates “a bit in a LMB corresponding to a MLD is set to 1 to indicate that the BUs are available in the corresponding link”; as indicated throughout, these bits are “used by the respective non-AP MLDs to determine which link(s) they should wake up to retrieve the buffered MPDUs from the AP MLD” (see [0064]); thus, the bit identifies whether a particular link for a particular non-AP (STA) MLD should wake-up because buffered data is available); and an identifier corresponding to a link that needs to be woken up in the first link identifiers is set to a second value, for waking up the corresponding link (disclosed throughout; the bits in the TIM bitmap and those in the LMB are wake-up indication bits as indicated in Figure 12; if a bit corresponding to the AID for a particular non-AP (STA) MLD is set to 1, this indicates that this particular non-AP MLD has data buffered; further, the LMB is used to indicated a particular link to wakeup; see [0082], which indicates “a bit in a LMB corresponding to a MLD is set to 1 to indicate that the BUs are available in the corresponding link”; as indicated throughout, these bits are “used by the respective non-AP MLDs to determine which link(s) they should wake up to retrieve the buffered MPDUs from the AP MLD” (see [0064]); thus, the bit identifies whether a particular link for a particular non-AP (STA) MLD should wake-up because buffered data is available; similarly, the link-set values are set to indicate whether or not the corresponding link-set has buffered data and should wake up; see Figure 14 and the corresponding description); and
waking up the corresponding link based on the wake-up information (as indicated throughout, these bits in the message frame are “used by the respective non-AP MLDs to determine which link(s) they should wake up to retrieve the buffered MPDUs from the AP MLD” (see [0064])).
Chitrakar is silent regarding the limitations that the wake-up information is carried in a media access control (MAC) frame header portion of the first message frame. However, Kwon discloses in [0131] that an “indication if the non-AP MLD is in the Awake state or not on the other link(s) among a set of links is included in a MAC header part of the trigger frame”. Further, “the indication is a link bitmap, wherein each different bit in the link bitmap indicates if a link corresponding to the bit is in the Awake state or not”. That is, the indication is analogous to the bitmap structure of Chitrakar that includes the wake-up information. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify Chitrakar to include the wake-up information (including the bitmap structure) in the MAC header as suggested by Kwon. The rationale for doing so would have been to minimize the amount of decoding required to determine the wake-up state of the additional links.
Regarding claim 24: Chitrakar discloses a communication device, comprising:
a processor (see the circuitry 814 of Figure 8, which includes a controller 806, for example); and
a memory storing computer programs executable by the processor (see [0069] and [0141], which indicates that the controller uses software to execute tasks; clearly, the software is stored on a memory within or accessible by the controller; see also the “storage” discussed in [0069], which can be provided on an “appropriate circuit board and/or in chipsets”),
wherein the processor is configured to perform the method of claim 1 (see the rejection of claim 1 above, which explains how the method of claim 1 is disclosed in the prior art).
Regarding claim 25: Chitrakar discloses a non-transitory computer readable storage medium having stored thereon computer programs stored that, when executed by a processor (see the circuitry 814 of Figure 8, which includes a controller 806, for example; see also [0069] and [0141], which indicates that the controller uses software to execute tasks; clearly, the software is stored on a memory within or accessible by the controller; see also the “storage” discussed in [0069], which can be provided on an “appropriate circuit board and/or in chipsets”) , cause the processor to perform the method of claim 1 (see the rejection of claim 1 above, which explains how the method of claim 1 is disclosed in the prior art).
Regarding claim 26: Chitrakar discloses a communication device, comprising:
a processor (see the circuitry 814 of Figure 8, which includes a controller 806, for example); and
a memory storing computer programs executable by the processor (see [0069] and [0141], which indicates that the controller uses software to execute tasks; clearly, the software is stored on a memory within or accessible by the controller; see also the “storage” discussed in [0069], which can be provided on an “appropriate circuit board and/or in chipsets”), wherein the processor is configured to perform the method of claim 10 (see the rejection of claim 10 above, which explains how the method of claim 10 is disclosed in the prior art).
Regarding claim 4: Chitrakar discloses the limitation wherein the wake-up information comprises a second link set identifier corresponding to a link set (disclosed throughout; consider Figure 14 and the corresponding description, for example; as indicated in [0091], the information in the generated frame (the link/TID/AC information) includes link-set information; as illustrated in Figure 14, a link-set bitmap is included, which as indicated in [0092], includes a bit corresponding to each link-set, the value indicating the wake-up state for that particular link-set for the MLD).
Regarding claim 7: Chitrakar discloses the limitation wherein the method further comprises: setting an identifier corresponding to a link that needs to be woken up in the second link set identifier to the second value, for waking up the corresponding link. (disclosed throughout; the bits in the TIM bitmap and those in the LMB are wake-up indication bits as indicated in Figure 12; if a bit corresponding to the AID for a particular non-AP (STA) MLD is set to 1, this indicates that this particular non-AP MLD has data buffered; further, the LMB is used to indicated a particular link to wakeup; see [0082], which indicates “a bit in a LMB corresponding to a MLD is set to 1 to indicate that the BUs are available in the corresponding link”; as indicated throughout, these bits are “used by the respective non-AP MLDs to determine which link(s) they should wake up to retrieve the buffered MPDUs from the AP MLD” (see [0064]); thus, the bit identifies whether a particular link for a particular non-AP (STA) MLD should wake-up because buffered data is available; similarly, the link-set values are set to indicate whether or not the corresponding link-set has buffered data and should wake up; see Figure 14 and the corresponding description).
Regarding claim 9: Chitrakar discloses the limitation that the first message frame comprises at least one of a data frame or a management frame (disclosed throughout; see Figure 10, for example, which discloses that the frame is a beacon frame/TIM frame, which is a management frame).
Claim 16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Liu et al (US 2025/081097) in view of Kwon et al (US 2021/0385692).
Regarding claim 16: Liu discloses a method for communication on multiple links, performed by a station, comprising:
determining a third message frame, wherein the third message frame comprises doze information for indicating a doze state of one or more links (see [0097], for example, which indicates that “STA 726b can enter a normal power saving mode (e.g., a lossless power saving mode) by transmitting a frame 739 with the PM field set to 1”; clearly, the frame 739 comprises doze information indicating a doze state (the PM field set to 1)), and the doze information comprises a power management identifier (see [0097]; the PM field is a power management identifier); and respective first link identifiers corresponding to the one or more links (disclosed throughout; as indicated in Figure 13 and [0132], the header of the frame includes one or more source addresses; further, as indicated in [0064], each STA in a non-AP MLD has an associated MAC address and as indicated in [0063], each STA is associated with a particular link of the non-AP MLD; therefore, the source addresses in the frame are reasonably interpreted as link identifiers for the doze state information);
setting the power management identifier to a first value, for indicating a need to enter a power saving mode (see [0097]; the PM field is set to a first value (1) to indicate that the STA 726b is entering a power save mode);
setting an identifier corresponding to a link that needs to doze in the first link identifiers to a second value, for indicating the corresponding link in a power saving mode (disclosed throughout; the identifier of the corresponding AP and associated link is set in the frame as discussed above; see Figures 7 and 13 and [0097] as well as [0063], [0064], and [0132] as described above);
sending the third message frame to notify an access point (AP) of the doze state of the one or more links (as indicated in Figure 7, the STA sends the message).
Chitrakar is silent regarding the limitations that the wake-up information is carried in a media access control (MAC) frame header portion of the first message frame. However, Kwon discloses in [0131] that an “indication if the non-AP MLD is in the Awake state or not on the other link(s) among a set of links is included in a MAC header part of the trigger frame”. Further, “the indication is a link bitmap, wherein each different bit in the link bitmap indicates if a link corresponding to the bit is in the Awake state or not”. That is, the indication is analogous to the bitmap structure of Chitrakar that includes the wake-up information. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify Chitrakar to include the wake-up information (including the bitmap structure) in the MAC header as suggested by Kwon. The rationale for doing so would have been to minimize the amount of decoding required to determine the wake-up state of the additional links.
Claim 8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chitrakar et al (US 2023/0232276) in view of Kwon et al (US 2021/0385692) in view of Kim et al (US 2023/0224814).
Regarding claim 8: Chitrakar discloses the limitations of parent claim 1 as indicated above. Chitrakar is silent regarding the limitations of claim 5 of receiving a second message frame on a link that is woken up; and sending the cached downlink data frame over the link that is woken up in response to the second message frame. However, Kim discloses a similar system which also transmits an indication of whether a link is to wake-up to receive a cached/buffered data frame. For example, consider [0189], which discloses “When AP MLD transmits a DL frame to a non-STR non-AP MLD, the AP MLD may include an indication indicating the presence or absence of buffer data of other STAs (that is, another link) of the same non-AP MLD in the DL frame (for example, DL data or DL BA, etc.) and may transmit it. Based on the indication, the STA of the non-AP MLD may maintain or change the power state of its own link. … when the STA of the non-AP MLD is in the doze state, if the non-AP MLD (that is, another STA of the non-AP MLD including the STA) receives a DL frame from the AP MLD, and the indication indicates that there is buffer data for the STA, the STA may transition to the awake state”. Further, Kim discloses in [0333], that after receiving the “awake information”, STA 2 of the non-AP MLD “may transmit a frame for notifying the AP 2 that it has awakened according to the UL TX timing for ACK of STA 1 (for example, PS-Poll or QoS null frames)”. As indicated later in [0333], “After confirming that STA 2 has awakened, AP 2 may start transmitting DL data to STA 2 during DL 3 frame transmission of AP 1”. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify Chitrakar to send a message notifying the access point that the link is awake and in response sending the buffered data frame to the non-AP MLD on the awake link/STA. The rationale for doing so would have been to improve the reliability of the system and avoid unnecessary waste of resources by only sending the buffered data after confirmation that the link is awake.
Claim 15 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chitrakar et al (US 2023/0232276) in view of Kwon et al (US 2021/0385692) in view of Liu et al (US 2025/081097).
Regarding claim 15: Chitrakar discloses the limitations of parent claim 10 as indicated above. Chitrakar is silent regarding the limitations of claim 15 of sending a second message frame, wherein the second message frame comprises doze information for indicating a doze state of one or more links. However, Liu discloses sending a message frame comprising doze information for indicating a doze state of one or more links. See [0097], for example, which indicates that “STA 726b can enter a normal power saving mode (e.g., a lossless power saving mode) by transmitting a frame 739 with the PM field set to 1”. Clearly, the frame 739 comprises doze information indicating a doze state (the PM field set to 1). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify Chitrakar to use a message for sending a doze state of a link from a non-AP MLD as suggested by Liu . The rationale for doing so would have been to enable the system to remain updated when the non-AP MLD STA enters a power save mode by informing the access point of the state change as suggested by Liu.
Claim 21 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Liu et al (US 2025/081097) in view of Kwon et al (US 2021/0385692) in view of Chitrakar et al (US 2023/0232276).
Regarding claim 21: Liu discloses the limitations of parent claim 16 as indicate above. Liu is silent regarding the limitation that the doze information comprises a fourth link set identifier corresponding to a link set and the method further comprises: setting an identifier corresponding to a link that needs to doze in the fourth link set identifier to a second value, for indicating the corresponding link in a power saving mode. However, Chitrakar discloses a similar system for power saving in multi-link devices. Chitrakar further discloses using link-set identifiers to identify sets of links to which power saving information applies. For example, consider Figure 14 and the corresponding description. As indicated in [0091], the information in the generated frame (the link/TID/AC information) includes link-set information. As illustrated in Figure 14, a link-set bitmap is included, which as indicated in [0092], includes a bit corresponding to each link-set, the value indicating the wake-up state for that particular link-set for the MLD. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify Liu to utilize link set identifiers to indicate links in power save messaging as suggested by Chitrakar. The rationale for doing so would have been to reduce the amount of signaling required to indicate link-related information by grouping links into sets that are configured similarly as suggested by Chitrakar.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Robert C Scheibel whose telephone number is (571)272-3169. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 8:00 AM - 5:00 PM.
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, Hassan A Phillips can be reached at 571-272-3940. 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.
Robert C. Scheibel
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 2467
/Robert C Scheibel/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2467 September 21, 2026
Prosecution Insights