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
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) filed 02/23/2026 have been considered but are not persuasive. Park have been withdrawn and a new ground of rejection was made in view of Ajami in view of Muhammad. The reasons were set forth below:
Applicant’s Arguments and Examiner’s Response: Applicant’s Argument 1: Applicant’s argument in page 12-13, recited “As noted by the Office Action, Park does not disclose or suggest a transceiver configured to receive TWT SP that corresponds to a trigger-enabled TWT schedule that is configured such that the trigger frame includes an indication that the trigger frame is for a triggered transmission opportunity sharing (TXS) mode that allows P2P communication during the TWT SP, wherein the trigger frame includes a Common Info field set to indicate that the trigger frame is for multiuser request to send (MU-RTS) TXS Mode 2; and a processor operably coupled to the transceiver, the processor configured to, based on receipt of the trigger frame, begin a P2P session with a peer STA during the TWT SP. (See, Office Action, page 5). The Applicant respectfully submits that Park does not disclose or suggest that the trigger frame includes more than one user information field, each user information field associated with a corresponding STA, and information on which portion of a transmit opportunity (TXOP) at the TWT SP is assigned to the STA and to the corresponding STA. Ajami does not cure the deficiencies of Park. Ajami describes that an AP, after obtaining a TXOP, transmits a trigger frame that allocates a portion of the TXOP obtained by the AP for P2P communication. The trigger frame includes a duration field indicating a duration of time for which the TXOP is allocated for P2P communications. (See, Ajami, par. [0114]). However, Ajami does not teach or suggest that the trigger frame includes more than one user information field, each user information field associated with a corresponding STA, and information on which portion of a TXOP at the TWT SP is assigned to the STA and to the corresponding STA. Thus, Ajami fails to disclose or suggest a wireless STA having "a transceiver configured to receive a trigger frame during a target wake time (TWT) service period (SP) that corresponds to a trigger-enabled TWT schedule ... wherein the trigger frame includes more than one user information field, each user information field associated with a corresponding STA, and information on which portion of a transmit opportunity (TXOP) at the TWT SP is assigned to the STA and to the corresponding STA" as recited in amended Claim 1. The addition of Muhammad does not cure the deficiencies of Park and Ajami. In Muhammad, when the AP transmits the MU RTS TXS Trigger to STAI, STAI simply uses the allocated TXOP to exchange LST with STA2 over Link2. However, the AP does not transmit a trigger frame that includes "more than one user information field, each user information field associated with a corresponding STA, and information on which portion of a transmit opportunity (TXOP) at the TWT SP is assigned to the STA and to the corresponding STA" as recited in amended Claim 1. For at least these reasons, Claim 1 and its dependent claims are allowable. For similar reasons, Claims 8 and 15 and their respective dependent claims are allowable. The Applicant respectfully requests that the§ 103 rejection be withdrawn”.
The examiner disagrees. Park have been withdrawn and the claims are further rejected in view of Ajami in view of Muhammad: Ajami teaches: at least a trigger frame includes a Common Info field wherein the trigger frame further includes: more than one user information field, each user information field associated with a corresponding STA (Ajami: fig 8, para [0204]-[0205], where, the trigger frame further includes multiple information field such as, MU-RTS), and information on which portion of a transmit opportunity (TXOP) at the TWT SP is assigned to the STA and to the corresponding STA (Ajami: fig 8, para [0206]-[0207], where, “where the TXOP sharing mode subfield indicates a request for the STA to transmit, responsive to the MU-RTS TXS trigger frame, a clear-to-send (CTS) frame including a receiver address field containing the MAC address of the client device”); Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to use the teaching of Muhammad into the system of Ajami in order to improve overall latency for several applications and use cases where p2p traffic is involved. Therefore, Ajami in view of Muhammad teaches all the required elements warranted by the claim limitation. Hence the arguments are traversed.
All the remaining arguments are based on the arguments above and are responded to in full.
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.
The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 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.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claims 1-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ajami et al (US 2023/0104446 A1), hereinafter, “Ajami”, further in view of Muhammad eta al (MUHAMMAD KUMAIL HAIDER et al, p2p Support in Restricted TWIT: Use Cases and Signaling Design Discussion' IEEE 802.11.21/1855r0, 11 November 2021), hereinafter, “Muhammad”.
Regarding claim 1, Ajami discloses: A wireless station (STA) device (Ajami: fig 6B, para [0023], where, fig 6B shows a block diagram if an example station (STA)) comprising: a transceiver configured to receive, from an access point (AP), a trigger frame during a target wake time (TWT) service period (SP) (Ajami: para [0049], where, “The AP may construct a Network Allocation Vector (NAV) exception for the client device based on information received in the request frame, and transmit a response frame to the STA. The AP may obtain a transmission opportunity (TXOP) on the wireless medium, and may transmit a trigger frame on the wireless medium during the r-TWT SP”), that corresponds to a trigger-enabled TWT schedule that is configured such that the trigger frame includes an indication that the trigger frame is for a triggered transmission opportunity sharing (TXS) mode that allows peer-to-peer (P2P) communication during the TWT SP (Ajami: para [0330]-[0332], where, “receiving a request frame from a wireless station (STA) associated with the AP and collocated with a softAP associated with a peer-to-peer (P2P) client device, the request frame indicating that the softAP intends to exchange P2P communications with the client device during a restricted target wake time (r-TWT) service period (SP) scheduled on a wireless medium, see further fig 9, para [0112]-[0117);
wherein the trigger frame includes a Common Info field (Ajami: fig 3A and B, para [0065], where, the trigger frame includes a common field), a processor operably coupled to the transceiver, the processor configured to (Ajami: fig 5, para [0078], where, the communication device includes processor 506 and memory 508), based on receipt of the trigger frame, begin a P2P session with a peer STA during the TWT SP (Ajami: fig 16-18, para [0261]-[0262], where, receiving the first trigger frame in a P2P session, para [0269]); and wherein the trigger frame further includes: more than one user information field, each user information field associated with a corresponding STA (Ajami: fig 8, para [0204]-[0205], where, the trigger frame further includes multiple information field such as, MU-RTS), and information on which portion of a transmit opportunity (TXOP) at the TWT SP is assigned to the STA and to the corresponding STA (Ajami: fig 8, para [0206]-[0207], where, “where the TXOP sharing mode subfield indicates a request for the STA to transmit, responsive to the MU-RTS TXS trigger frame, a clear-to-send (CTS) frame including a receiver address field containing the MAC address of the client device”);
Ajami does not explicitly teach: set to indicate that the trigger frame is for multi-user request to send (MU-RTS) TXS Mode 2;
Muhammad teaches: set to indicate that the trigger frame is for multi-user request to send (MU-RTS) TXS Mode 2 (Muhammad: page 7, “Example ·usage scenario of proposed signaling”, where, “AP then send an MU-RTS TXS Trigger to STA1 with TXOP Sharing Mode 2 and STA1 uses allocated TXOP to exchange LST on Link1 with STA2” and page 9, SUMMARY: where, “Discuss signaling design for p2p support in r-TWT and clarify/extend rules for using MU RTS TXS Trigger with TXOP Sharing Mode 2 for p2p traffic”).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to use “set to indicate that the trigger frame is for multi-user request to send (MU-RTS) TXS Mode 2” as taught by Muhammad into the system of Ajami in order to improve overall latency for several applications and use cases where p2p traffic is involved (Muhammad: page 9);
Regarding claim 8, the claim includes features identical to the subject matter mentioned in the rejection to claim 1 above. The claims are mere reformulation of claim 1 in order to define the corresponding packet processing access point, and the rejection to claim 1 is applied hereto.
Regarding claim 15, the claim includes features identical to the subject matter mentioned in the rejection to claim 1 above. The claims are mere reformulation of claim 1 in order to define the corresponding packet processing method, and the rejection to claim 1 is applied hereto.
Regarding claims 2, 9 and 16, Ajami further modified by Muhammad disclose: the trigger frame is a MU-RTS trigger frame the triggered TXS mode that allows P2P communication is MU-RTS TXS Mode (Muhammad: page 7, “Example ·usage scenario of proposed signaling”, where, “AP then send an MU-RTS TXS Trigger to STA1 with TXOP Sharing Mode 2 and STA1 uses allocated TXOP to exchange LST on Link1 with STA2” and page 9, SUMMARY: where, “Discuss signaling design for p2p support in r-TWT and clarify/extend rules for using MU RTS TXS Trigger with TXOP Sharing Mode 2 for p2p traffic”) and a Triggered TXOP Sharing Mode subfield in a Common Info field (Ajami: fig 3A and B, para [0065], where, the trigger frame includes a common field), of the MU-RTS trigger frame is set to a value of 2 to indicate that the MU-RTS trigger frame is for MU-RTS TXS Mode 2 (Muhammad: page 7, “Example ·usage scenario of proposed signaling”, where, “AP then send an MU-RTS TXS Trigger to STA1 with TXOP Sharing Mode 2 and STA1 uses allocated TXOP to exchange LST on Link1 with STA2” and page 9, SUMMARY: where, “Discuss signaling design for p2p support in r-TWT and clarify/extend rules for using MU RTS TXS Trigger with TXOP Sharing Mode 2 for p2p traffic”).
Regarding claims 3, 10 and 17, Ajami further modified by Muhammad disclose: wherein the processor (Ajami: fig 6A-B, processors 630/635, para [0211]) is further configured to: negotiate with the AP to become a member of the trigger-enabled TWT schedule (Ajami: para [0009], where, “is configured to receive a request frame from a STA associated with the AP and also associated with a client device via a P2P link, the request frame indicating that the STA intends to exchange P2P communications with the client device during a r-TWT SP scheduled on a wireless medium, the request frame identifying the client device”),
wherein the TWT SP that corresponds to the trigger-enabled TWT schedule has a start time, an end time, and a periodicity (Ajami: fig 6A, 6B and 7-8, para [0099], where, “the existing rules regarding restricted TWT operation require non-member STAs to terminate their TXOPs by the start of a restricted TWT SP. The restricted TWT SP of FIG. 8 starts at time t.sub.1, and thus all non-member STAs (such as the third STA 730) truncate their respective TXOPs”); and after becoming a member of the trigger-enabled TWT schedule, establish the P2P session with the peer STA such that a start time, an end time, and a periodicity of the P2P session are synchronized with, respectively, the start time, the end time, and the periodicity of the TWT SP (Ajami: fig 6A, 6B and 7-8, para [0114], where, “At time t.sub.7, which may be a SIFS duration after an end of the transmission of the block ACK frame 913, the AP 702 obtains a TXOP, and transmits a MU-RTS TXS trigger frame 920 over the wireless medium between times t.sub.7 and t.sub.8. The MU-RTS TXS trigger frame 920 allocates a portion of the TXOP obtained by the AP 702 for P2P communications between the client device 712 and the first softAP 711 during the r-TWT SP. The MU-RTS TXS trigger frame 920 includes a duration field indicating a duration of time (Ti) for which the TXOP is allocated for P2P communications”).
Regarding claims 4, 11 and 18, Ajami further modified by Muhammad disclose: wherein the processor (Ajami: fig 6A-B, processors 630/635, para [0211]) is further configured to: establish the P2P session with the peer STA with a start time, an end time, and a periodicity (Ajami: fig 16, steps 1602-1608, para [0154]-[0156], where, STA intends to establish P2P session peer STA, step 1602, “the TWT Element may be used to signal the STA’s intention to use the wireless medium for P2P communications with the client device during the r-TWT SP. The TWT Element may also indicate various TWT parameters including (but not limited to) a periodicity of the r-TWT SP”); and after establishing the P2P session, negotiate with the AP to become a member of the trigger-enabled TWT schedule (Ajami: fig 7-8, para [0097]-[0099], where, negotiate with the AP to become member of scheduled r-TWT SP), such that a start time, an end time, and a periodicity of the TWT SP that corresponds to the trigger-enabled TWT schedule are synchronized with, respectively, the start time, the end time, and the periodicity of the P2P session (Ajami: para [0085], where, “For UL MU transmissions, an AP 102 can transmit a trigger frame to initiate and synchronize an UL MU-OFDMA or UL MU-MIMO transmission from multiple STAs 104 to the AP 102. Such trigger frames may thus enable multiple STAs 104 to send UL traffic to the AP 102 concurrently in time. A trigger frame may address one or more STAs 104 through respective association identifiers (AIDs)”).
Regarding claims 5 and 19, Ajami further modified by Muhammad disclose: wherein the trigger-enabled TWT schedule is configured such that all trigger frames sent during any TWT SP corresponding to the trigger-enabled TWT schedule (Ajami: fig 6 A-B, para [0213]-[0214], where, “receive a request frame from a wireless station (STA) associated with the AP and also associated with a client device via a peer-to-peer (P2P) link, the request frame indicating that the STA intends to exchange P2P communications with the client device during a restricted target wake time (r-TWT) service period (SP) scheduled on a wireless medium, the request frame identifying the client device”) include the indication that the trigger frame is for the triggered TXS mode that allows P2P communication during that TWT SP (Ajami: fig 7-8, para [0110], where, “this allows the first STA 710 to determine whether it is the only member of the r-TWT SP, and thus whether it can use aggressive channel access techniques, rather than MU-RTS TXS trigger frames, during the r-TWT SP”).
Regarding claims 6 and 12, Ajami further modified by Muhammad disclose: wherein: the transceiver (Ajami: fig 6A-B, processors 630/635, para [0211]) is further configured to receive the trigger frame at any point in time during the TWT SP (Ajami: para [0180], where, “The duration field 2002 may store information indicating a duration or length of the trigger frame 2000. The RA field 2003 may store the address of a receiving device, such as one or more of the STAs of FIGS. 8-15”), and the processor (Ajami: fig 6A-B, processors 630/635, para [0211])is further configured to, based on receipt of the trigger frame, begin the P2P session with the peer STA during the TWT SP (Ajami: para [0180], where, “The duration field 2002 may store information indicating a duration or length of the trigger frame 2000. The RA field 2003 may store the address of a receiving device, such as one or more of the STAs of FIGS. 8-15”) such that an end time of the P2P session is synchronized with an end time of the TWT SP (Ajami: fig 4, para [0075], where, “For UL MU transmissions, an AP 102 can transmit a trigger frame to initiate and synchronize an UL MU-OFDMA or UL MU-MIMO transmission from multiple STAs 104 to the AP 102”).
Regarding claims 7 and 14, Ajami further modified by Muhammad disclose: wherein the processor (Ajami: fig 6A-B, processors 630/635, para [0211]) is further configured to: determine whether the trigger frame is addressed to the STA (Ajami: para [0180], where, “The duration field 2002 may store information indicating a duration or length of the trigger frame 2000. The RA field 2003 may store the address of a receiving device, such as one or more of the STAs of FIGS. 8-15”); and begin the P2P session with the peer STA (Ajami: para [0087], where, established a P2P session) after a determination that the trigger frame is addressed to the STA (Ajami: fig 15, para [0151], where, “the BSS may include any number of low-latency STAs, and may also include any number of non-legacy STAs. The timing diagram of FIG. 15 is similar to the timing diagram of FIG. 14, except that the AP 702 uses frequency multiplexing to scheduled multiple P2P sessions within a r-TWT SP, concurrently. As shown, the AP 702 schedules P2P communications associated with the first STA 710 in a lower 20 MHz frequency subband, and schedules P2P communications associated with the second STA 720 in a upper 20 MHz frequency subband”).
Regarding claims 13 and 20, Ajami further modified by Muhammad disclose: wherein the transceiver (Ajami: fig 6A-B, processors 630/635, para [0211]) is further configured to transmit the trigger frame at any point in time during the TWT SP to trigger the STA to begin the P2P session with the peer STA during the TWT SP such that an end time of the P2P session is synchronized with an end time of the TWT SP (Ajami: fig 15, para [0151], where, “the BSS may include any number of low-latency STAs, and may also include any number of non-legacy STAs. The timing diagram of FIG. 15 is similar to the timing diagram of FIG. 14, except that the AP 702 uses frequency multiplexing to scheduled multiple P2P sessions within a r-TWT SP, concurrently. As shown, the AP 702 schedules P2P communications associated with the first STA 710 in a lower 20 MHz frequency subband, and schedules P2P communications associated with the second STA 720 in a upper 20 MHz frequency subband”).
Conclusion
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 NIZAM U AHMED whose telephone number is (571)272-9561. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fry, 7:00 AM-6:00 PM PST.
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, Huy Vu can be reached at 571-272-3155. 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.
/NIZAM U AHMED/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2461
Prosecution Insights