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 Amendment
Applicant’s submission filed 06/10/2026 has been entered. Claims 1, 5, 11, and 15 are amended. Claims 4 and 14 are cancelled. Claims 21 and 22 are new. Claims 1, 3, 5-11, 13, 15-20, and 21-22 are pending.
Response to Arguments
Applicant argues with respect to claims 1 and 11, Remarks, pgs. 1-2, that Asterjadhi fails to teach “set a first subfield of the frame to an address of a receiver device receiving the frame over a wireless local area (WLAN); set a second subfield of the frame to a first value indicating that the frame is to convey the R-TWT schedule to the receiver device,”
Regarding “set a first subfield of the frame to an address of a receiver device receiving the frame over a wireless local area (WLAN)” Applicant argues Asterjadhi does not contemplate sending a TWT schedule to a specific device.
Examiner respectfully disagrees.
Asterjadhi explicitly teaches send a TWT schedule to a specific device:
Asterjadhi, [0054]: FIG. 2 is an exemplary diagram of a TWT element 200 for supporting target wake time and trigger frame scheduling. To enable a TWT scheduling, an AP and a STA, for example, may negotiate a target wake time using a TWT element that provides the necessary signaling between devices to schedule one or more target wake times and their corresponding parameters. The TWT element may be transmitted in an individually addressed management frame that can be of type action, action no ack, (re)association request/response, probe request response, etc., when the TWTs are negotiated between the first wireless device and the second wireless device, e.g., during a TWT setup phase.
Regarding “set a second subfield of the frame to a first value indicating that the frame is to convey the R-TWT schedule to the receiver device,” arguments are moot because the new grounds of rejection does not relay on any prior reference applied in the prior art rejection of record far any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
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 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.
Claims 1, 3, 5-11, 13, and 15-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Asterjadhi et al. (US 2016/0219522), Asterjadhi hereinafter, in view Lu et al. (US 2023/0413331), Lu hereinafter.
Re. Claim 1. An access point (AP) device (Asterjadhi, ¶0187: FIG. 17 shows an example functional block diagram of a wireless device 1702 that may perform TWT scheduling within the wireless communication system 100 of FIG.1. …
For example, the wireless device 1702 may comprise one of the APs 104, 302, 602, 902 or one of the STAs 112, 114, 116, 118, 306, 308, 310, 606, 608, 610, 906, 908, 910.) comprising:
one or more processors (Asterjadhi, 0188: The wireless device 1702 may include a processor 1704 which controls operation of the wireless device 1702.) configured to:
generate a frame including information on a target wake time (TWT) schedule The second topic relates to a broadcast TWT protocol in which a first wireless device, such as for example an AP, may determine a TWT schedule for one or more wireless devices (e.g., multiple STAs).);
set a first subfield of the frame to an address of a receiver device receiving the frame over a wireless local area network (WLAN) (Asterjadhi, 0054: The TWT element may be transmitted in an individually addressed management frame that can be of type action, action no ack, (re)association request/response, probe request response, etc., when the TWTs are negotiated between the first wireless device and the second wireless device, e.g., during a TWT setup phase.
[It is necessary for an individually address management frame to include a subfield indicating the receiver device.]); and
wirelessly transmit, via a transmitter over the WLAN, the generated frame to the receiver device (Asterjadhi, [0054] FIG. 2 is an exemplary diagram of a TWT element 200 for supporting target wake time and trigger frame scheduling. To enable a TWT scheduling, an AP and a STA, for example, may negotiate a target wake time using a TWT element that provides the necessary signaling between devices to schedule one or more target wake times and their corresponding parameters.).
Yet, Asterjadhi does not explicitly teach a restricted TWT (R-TWT) schedule that provides one or more service periods (SPs) during which collision is avoided or reduced; and set a second subfield of the frame to a first value indicating that the frame is to convey the R-TWT schedule to the receiver device;
However, in the related art, Lu teaches a restricted TWT (R-TWT) schedule that provides one or more service periods (SPs) during which collision is avoided or reduced (Lu, [0038] Various embodiments of the invention provide a mechanism for coordinating R-TWT agreement setup process and R-TWT operation with TID-to-Link mapping in a WLAN. The R-TWT operation is provided to allow an AP to use enhanced medium access protection and resource reservation mechanisms to provide more predictable latency and reduce worst case latency and/or jitter so that the AP has higher reliability for latency sensitive traffic.); and
set a second subfield of the frame to a first value indicating that the frame is to convey the R-TWT schedule to the receiver device (Lu, [0059] In some embodiments, the R-TWT request from the first STA and/or the R-TWT response from the first AP may comprise an R-TWT element including a first subfield and a second subfield in a Control field, wherein the first subfield is set to indicate whether information included in the R-TWT element is for negotiation of parameters of R-TWT, and the second subfield is set to indicate whether the information included in the R-TWT element is applied to all links to which the at least one TID for latency sensitive traffic has been mapped.
[The first subfield of Lu corresponds to the second claimed second subfield.]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the invention of Asterjadhi with the R-TWT agreement setup process of Lu. The resulting invention would provide for more predictable latency and higher reliability for latency sensitive traffic (Lu, [0038]).
Re. Claim 3, Asterjadhi in view of Lu teaches claim 1.
Asterjadhi further teaches wherein the one or more processors are configured to: determine whether a configuration value of the device is true (Asterjadhi, 0049: In one example, the TWT component 124 may be configured to receive, from a second wireless device, a first message that includes a first trigger field. The first trigger field may indicate whether the first message includes a request for a trigger message to be sent by the first wireless device at a start of a TWT service period.); and
in response to the configuration value of the device being true, set the first subfield of the frame to the address of the receiver device (Asterjadhi, 0049: The TWT component 124 may be configured to determine a TWT schedule based on the received first message. The TWT component 124 may be configured to transmit a second message to the second wireless device. The second message may include the TWT schedule and a second trigger field based on the determined TWT schedule.
[It would be necessary to set the subfield of the frame to the address of the receiver device in order to send the frame to the correct location.]).
Re. Claim 5. Asterjadhi in view of Lu teaches claim 1.
Yet, Asterjadhi does not explicitly teach the TWT schedule includes a plurality of TWT schedules including the R-TWT schedule and a second TWT schedule, and the one or more processors are configured to set a third subfield of the frame to a second value indicating the frame relates to negotiation of membership in the second TWT schedule.
However, in the related art, Lu teaches the TWT schedule includes a plurality of TWT schedules including the R-TWT schedule and a second TWT schedule (Lu, [0046] Although in the first method 100, the first AP sends the first response upon receipt of the first request from the first STA, it should be noted that in some embodiments, the first AP may send an unsolicited first response without receiving the first request to map at least one TID for latency sensitive traffic to at least one link set up between the AP MLD and a non-AP MLD.
[0106] Step 605, AP1 sends an integrated R-TWT response to STA1 after receiving the integrated R-TWT request from STA1 to map the TIDs for latency sensitive traffic to Link 3 and set up the R-TWT agreements on Link 1, Link 2 and Link 3.
[The R-TWT agreements on the plurality of links correspond to the plurality of TWT schedules.]), and
the one or more processors are configured to set a third subfield of the frame to a second value indicating the frame relates to negotiation of membership in the second TWT schedule (Lu, [0059] In some embodiments, the R-TWT request from the first STA and/or the R-TWT response from the first AP may comprise an R-TWT element including a first subfield and a second subfield in a Control field, wherein the first subfield is set to indicate whether information included in the R-TWT element is for negotiation of parameters of R-TWT, and the second subfield is set to indicate whether the information included in the R-TWT element is applied to all links to which the at least one TID for latency sensitive traffic has been mapped.
[The second subfield of Lu corresponds to the claimed third subfield.]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the invention of Asterjadhi with the R-TWT agreement setup process of Lu. The resulting invention would provide for more predictable latency and higher reliability for latency sensitive traffic (Lu, [0038]).
Re. Claim 6, Asterjadhi in view of Lu teaches claim 1.
Asterjadhi further teaches wherein the frame is one of a Probe Response frame, an Association Response frame, a Reassociation Response frame, a TWT Setup frame, or a TWT Information frame (Asterjadhi, 0054: The TWT element may be transmitted in an individually addressed management frame that can be of type action, action no ack, (re)association request/response, probe request response, etc., when the TWTs are negotiated between the first wireless device and the second wireless device, e.g., during a TWT setup phase.).
Re. Claim 7, Asterjadhi in view of Lu teaches claim 1.
Asterjadhi further teaches wherein: the frame is an Action frame (Asterjadhi, 0054: The TWT element may be transmitted in an individually addressed management frame that can be of type action, action no ack, (re)association request/response, probe request response, etc., when the TWTs are negotiated between the first wireless device and the second wireless device, e.g., during a TWT setup phase.), and
the one or more processors are configured to set an action subfield of the Action frame to a value indicating TWT schedule information (Asterjadhi, 0058: Otherwise, if the TWT request field has a value of 0, then the TWT element 200 may represent a response to a request to initiate TWT scheduling/setup (solicit TWT), an unsolicited TWT (which is a response to initiate a TWT scheduling which is conceptually similar to the solicited TWT with the exception that the TWT requester STA did not send a TWT request to solicit this TWT response), and/or a non-negotiable TWT scheduling message (or a broadcast TWT message).).
Re. Claim 8, Asterjadhi in view of Lu teaches claim 1.
Asterjadhi further teaches receive, via a receiver from the receiver device, another Action frame whose action subfield is set to the value indicating the TWT schedule information (Asterjadhi, 0054: The TWT element may be transmitted in an individually addressed management frame that can be of type action, action no ack, (re)association request/response, probe request response, etc., when the TWTs are negotiated between the first wireless device and the second wireless device, e.g., during a TWT setup phase. And 0055: In this embodiment, the TWT schedule and parameters are provided during the TWT setup phase and renegotiation/changes of TWT schedules are signaled via individually addressed frames that contain the updated TWT parameters. These frames can be management frames as described above, control frames or data frames that carry a field containing the updated TWT schedule and its related parameters. In another aspect, two STAs may negotiate a TWT schedule and one STA may be the TWT requester and the other STA may be the TWT responder.);
determine whether a request subfield of the another Action frame is set to a third value indicating a request for the TWT schedule information (Asterjadhi, 0058: The TWT request field may indicate whether the TWT element 200 represents a request. If TWT request field has a value of 1, then the TWT element 200 may represent a request to initiate TWT scheduling/setup.); and
in response to the request subfield of the another Action frame being set to the third value, set a request subfield of the Action frame to a fourth value that is different from the third value and indicates a response to the request for the TWT schedule information (Asterjadhi, 0058: Otherwise, if the TWT request field has a value of 0, then the TWT element 200 may represent a response to a request to initiate TWT scheduling/setup (solicit TWT), an unsolicited TWT (which is a response to initiate a TWT scheduling which is conceptually similar to the solicited TWT with the exception that the TWT requester STA did not send a TWT request to solicit this TWT response), and/or a non-negotiable TWT scheduling message (or a broadcast TWT message).).
Re. Claim 9, Asterjadhi in view of Lu teaches claim 1.
Asterjadhi further teaches wherein the one or more processors are configured to:
receive another frame from the receiver device (Asterjadhi, 0061: In an aspect, a TWT responder, who receives a TWT request from a TWT requester and whose value of the TWT wake interval is equal to the TWT requester's listen interval, may respond to the TWT request with either an accept TWT or a reject TWT in the TWT command field.);
determine whether a fourth subfield of the another frame is set to a sixth value indicating a request for TWT schedule information (Asterjadhi, 0061: In an aspect, a TWT responder, who receives a TWT request from a TWT requester and whose value of the TWT wake interval is equal to the TWT requester's listen interval, may respond to the TWT request with either an accept TWT or a reject TWT in the TWT command field.); and
in response to the fourth subfield of the another frame being set to the sixth value, generate the frame such that the frame is a response frame to the another frame (Asterjadhi, 0061: In the case of an accept TWT, the accept TWT may include the value of the allocated first target beacon transmit time in the TWT wake time field and the value of the listen interval between consecutive target beacon transmit times (TBTTs) in the TWT wake interval mantissa and the TWT wake interval exponent fields.).
Re. Claim 10, Asterjadhi in view of Lu teaches claim 1.
Asterjadhi further teaches wherein the another frame is one of a Probe Request frame, a TWT Information frame, or a TWT Setup frame (Asterjadhi, 0053: FIG. 2 provides one exemplary diagram of a TWT element for TWT scheduling. And 0054: To enable a TWT scheduling, an AP and a STA, for example, may negotiate a target wake time using a TWT element that provides the necessary signaling between devices to schedule one or more target wake times and their corresponding parameters. The TWT element may be transmitted in an individually addressed management frame that can be of type action, action no ack, (re)association request/response, probe request response, etc., when the TWTs are negotiated between the first wireless device and the second wireless device, e.g., during a TWT setup phase.).
Re. Claim 11. Claim 11 is directed toward a method corresponding to the apparatus of claim 1. Claim 11 does not further limit or define over the subject matter of claim 1. Therefore, claim 11 is rejected for similar reason as laid out with regard to claim 1.
Re. Claim 13. Claim 13 is directed toward a method corresponding to the apparatus of claim 3. Claim 13 does not further limit or define over the subject matter of claim 3. Therefore, claim 13 is rejected for similar reason as laid out with regard to claim 3.
Re. Claim 15. Claim 15 is directed toward a method corresponding to the apparatus of claim 5. Claim 15 does not further limit or define over the subject matter of claim 5. Therefore, claim 15 is rejected for similar reason as laid out with regard to claim 5.
Re. Claim 16. Claim 16 is directed toward a method corresponding to the apparatus of claim 6. Claim 16 does not further limit or define over the subject matter of claim 6. Therefore, claim 16 is rejected for similar reason as laid out with regard to claim 6.
Re. Claim 17. Claim 17 is directed toward a method corresponding to the apparatus of claim 7. Claim 17 does not further limit or define over the subject matter of claim 7. Therefore, claim 17 is rejected for similar reason as laid out with regard to claim 7.
Re. Claim 18. Claim 18 is directed toward a method corresponding to the apparatus of claim 8. Claim 18 does not further limit or define over the subject matter of claim 8. Therefore, claim 18 is rejected for similar reason as laid out with regard to claim 8.
Re. Claim 19. Claim 19 is directed toward a method corresponding to the apparatus of claim 9. Claim 19 does not further limit or define over the subject matter of claim 9. Therefore, claim 19 is rejected for similar reason as laid out with regard to claim 9.
Re. Claim 20. Claim 20 is directed toward a method corresponding to the apparatus of claim 10. Claim 20 does not further limit or define over the subject matter of claim 10. Therefore, claim 20 is rejected for similar reason as laid out with regard to claim 10.
Re. Claim 21. Asterjadhi in view of Lu teaches claim 1.
Yet, Asterjadhi does not explicitly teach wherein the second subfield indicates a negotiation type.
However, in the related art, Lu teaches wherein the second subfield indicates a negotiation type (Lu [0082] As shown in FIG. 3B, the control field of the R-TWT element includes a Restricted TWT (R-TWT) Indicator subfield and an Applied links indicator subfield. The R-TWT Indicator subfield is set to indicate whether the information included in the element is used for negotiation of R-TWT parameters.
[The R-TWT Indicator subfield corresponds to the second subfield as in claim 1.])
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the invention of Asterjadhi with the R-TWT agreement setup process of Lu. The resulting invention would provide for more predictable latency and higher reliability for latency sensitive traffic (Lu, [0038]).
Re. Claim 22. Claim 22 is directed toward a method corresponding to the apparatus of claim 21. Claim 20 does not further limit or define over the subject matter of claim 21. Therefore, claim 22 is rejected for similar reason as laid out with regard to claim 21.
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 CASON H MORSE whose telephone number is (571)270-5235. The examiner can normally be reached 8:30-6:00 Mon.-Thurs., Fri. varies.
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, Rebecca Song can be reached at (571) 270-3667. 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.
/C.H.M./Examiner, Art Unit 2417
/REBECCA E SONG/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2417
Prosecution Insights