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. Specification The abstract of the disclosure is objected to because the word “setting” in line 8 should be changed to “set”. A corrected abstract of the disclosure is required and must be presented on a separate sheet, apart from any other text. See MPEP § 608.01(b). Claim Objections Claim 14 is objected to because of the following informalities: In line 7, the word “setting” should be changed to “set”. Appropriate correction is required. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112 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 s 7 , 15, and 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the enablement requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to enable one skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and/or use the invention. Claim 7 recites the limitation of “ wherein the second duration is less than the first duration minus a short interframe space (SIFs) and minus a time to transmit the RTS frame. ” However, paragraph [0114] of the disclosure recites (emphasis added): [00114] Wireless devices such destination904 and other 906 within the transmission range of the source902 set their NAVs to the end of the NAV (RTS)924, which includes time for the ACK922, in response to the receiving and decoding the RTS910 frame. The Duration1306 field is set to the value obtained from the Duration1206 field of the immediately previous RTS910 frame, minus the time, in microseconds, required to transmit the CTS914 frame and its SIFS912. Accordingly, the specification describes that the second duration is set to a value , based in part, on minus the time required to transmit the CTS frame . The specification does not appear to provide support for the second duration is less than a value, based in part, on minus a time to transmit the RTS frame . For purposes of examination, the Examiner assumes that claim 7 contains a typographical error and is intended to recite “ wherein the second duration is less than the first duration minus a short interframe space (SIFs) and minus a time to transmit the CTS frame . ” Claims 15 and 19 are rejected for similar reasons. The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b): (b ) CONCLUSION.— The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention. The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA), second paragraph: The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the appl icant regards as his invention. Claim s 1-13 and 15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention. Regarding claim 1, the phrase “before a transmission” in line 8 is unclear. In particular, it is unclear what type of transmission is being referred to, and/ or what entity is intended to perform the transmission. Regarding claim 4, claim 4 recites the limitation " the scheduled transmission" in line 1. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. It appears that claim 4 should be amended to be dependent upon claim 3 rather than claim 1. Further regarding claim 4, the phrase “another transmission band” in line 2 is unclear. In particular, there is no previous recitation of a “transmission band” . Therefore, the meaning of the recited “another transmission band” is unclear. Regarding claim 5, claim 5 recites the limitation “wherein the transmission is a lower energy transmission” in line 2. The term “ lower energy transmission ” in claim 5 is a relative term which renders the claim indefinite. The term “ lower energy tran s mission ” is not defined by the claim, the specification does not provide a standard for ascertaining the requisite degree, and one of ordinary skill in the art would not be reasonably apprised of the scope of the invention. Paragraph [00124] of the specification recites that “ [t] he Bluetooth® transmission1002 may be another type of transmission such as a lower-energy transmission, a transmission on another band such 60 GHz, and so forth. ” However, the specification does not appear to provide a standard for ascertaining the scope of what is considered a “lower energy transmission” within the context of claim 5. Regarding claim 9, claim 9 recites the limitation "the reduced second duration" in line 3. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. Regarding claim 15, the phrase “before a transmission” in line 2 is unclear. In particular, it is unclear what type of transmission is being referred to, and/or what entity is intended to perform the transmission. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103 In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis ( i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status. 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. Claim s 1- 4, 6-9, 12, and 14-19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nayak et al. (US 2023/0073868 A 1)( hereinafter “Nayak”) in view of Kneckt et al. (US 20 17 / 0257888 A1) (hereinafter “ Kneckt ”). . Regarding claim 1, Nayak discloses an apparatus of a station (STA) ( Fig. 2B: STA 111 ) , the apparatus comprising memory ( Fig. 2B: memory 260) ; and processing circuitry ( Fig. 2B: processor 2 4 0) coupled to the memory, the processing circuitry configured to: decode … a request to send (RTS) frame ( Fig. 7, [ ¶ 0094]: FIG. 7 illustrates an example of a frame format for the RTS frame 700 . [ ¶ 0095] : RTS/CTS is an 802.11 protocol to reduce frame collisions especially in a hidden terminal scenario. As a part of the procedure, a device with data to send, upon completing its backoff procedure, first transmits an RTS frame. The RTS frame has a format as shown in FIG. 7. ) , the RTS frame comprising an address of the STA ( Fig. 7: RA field ) and a first duration field, the first duration field indicating a first duration ( Fig. 7, [ ¶ 0095] : the RTS frame 700 contains a duration field . ) ; setting a second duration to a duration that ends before an end of the first duration ([ ¶ 0096] : u pon receiving the RTS frame, the receiver responds with a CTS frame which is transmitted SIFS duration following the end of the RTS frame. The CTS frame has a duration field just like the RTS frame. The receiver uses the value in the duration field of the received RTS frame and subtracts from it the time to transmit a CTS frame+one SIFS. The remainder value is used to set the duration field in the CTS frame which is transmitted in response to the RTS frame.) and ends before a transmission ([0093] t o overcome the problems arising from the signal leakage, the transmission start times and end times on a NSTR link pair are aligned. In the same manner, the reception start times and end times are also aligned to avoid interference from the transmission of the control frame (e.g., Block Ack) that follows the DATA reception.) ; and encode, for transmission, a clear-to-send (CTS) frame, the CTS frame comprising a second duration field, the second duration field indicating the second duration ([ ¶ 0096] : t he remainder value is used to set the duration field in the CTS frame which is transmitted in response to the RTS frame. ) . Although Nayak discloses decoding a RTS frame that includes a first duration field, Nayak does not specifically disclose the RTS frame is comprised of a physical layer protocol data unit (PPDU). However, Kneckt discloses to decode a physical layer protocol data unit (PPDU), the PPDU comprising a request to send (RTS) frame ( [ ¶ 0048] : a STA addressed by an MU-RTS frame may transmit a CTS response after the end of the PPDU containing the MU-RTS frame . ) . Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention for the RTS frame that includes a first duration field, as taught by Nayak, to be comprised within a PPDU, as taught by Kneckt . Doing so allows for transmission of data using existing wireless protocols (see Kneckt [¶0032]). Regarding claim 2, Nayak in view of Kneckt discloses all features of claim 1 as outlined above. Nayak also discloses wherein the RTS frame is received from an access point (AP) and the RTS frame further comprises an address of the AP ([ ¶ 0107] : i n one embodiment, each AP can use an RTS/CTS based probing procedure to check the status of other STAs affiliated with the non-AP MBD. According to this embodiment, AP2 can transmit an RTS frame on link2 to STA2) . Nayak does not explicitly disclose that encoding the CTS includes encoding the CTS to comprise the address of the AP. However, Kneckt discloses wherein the encode the CTS frame further comprises: encoding the CTS frame to comprise the address of the AP ( Fig. 3C, [¶0083]: FIG. 3C illustrates a portion of a CTS frame 330. CTS frame 330 may include receiving address field RA 331. ) . Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention for the CTS frame that includes a second duration field, as taught by Nayak, to include an address of the AP, as taught by Kneckt . Doing so allows for the correct AP to receive the CTS from the STA. Regarding claim 3, Nayak in view of Kneckt discloses all features of claim 1 as outlined above. Nayak also discloses also wherein the transmission is a scheduled transmission to or from the STA ( [ ¶ 0088]: If a disassociation frame is not received at STA1 from AP1, then STA2 of the MBD may negotiate an individual or broadcast target wake time (TWT) with a certain service period SP2 with AP2 first. After a successful TWT negotiation with AP2, STA1 of the MBD may transmit another SMNF to AP1 to perform unmuting on link1. It may then perform a TWT servicer period negotiation with AP1 such that the service period SP1 is non-overlapping with SP2 that is operational on link2. Accordingly, Nayak discloses configuring scheduled transmission to or from the STA ) . Regarding claim 4, Nayak in view of Kneckt discloses all features of claim 1 as outlined above. Nayak also discloses wherein the scheduled transmission is on another transmission band ([ ¶ 0005] : i n one embodiment, a non-access point (AP) multi-band device (MBD) is provided. The non-AP MBD comprises: stations (STAs), each comprising a transceiver configured to form a link with a corresponding AP, wherein respective links operate on different frequency bands.) . Regarding claim 6, Nayak in view of Kneckt discloses all features of claim 3 as outlined above. Nayak also discloses wherein the scheduled transmission is to or by the STA ( ( [¶0088]: If a disassociation frame is not received at STA1 from AP1, then STA2 of the MBD may negotiate an individual or broadcast target wake time (TWT) with a certain service period SP2 with AP2 first. After a successful TWT negotiation with AP2, STA1 of the MBD may transmit another SMNF to AP1 to perform unmuting on link1. It may then perform a TWT servicer period negotiation with AP1 such that the service period SP1 is non-overlapping with SP2 that is operational on link2. Accordingly, Nayak discloses configuring scheduled transmission to or from the STA ) ) . Regarding claim 7, Nayak in view of Kneckt discloses all features of claim 3 as outlined above. As discussed above with respect to the rejection of claim 7 under 35 U.S.C. 112(a), the specification does not appear to provide support for the second duration is less than a value, based in part, on minus a time to transmit the RTS frame . For purposes of examination, the Examiner assumes that claim 7 contains a typographical error and is intended to recite “ wherein the second duration is less than the first duration minus a short interframe space (SIFs) and minus a time to transmit the CTS frame . ” Nayak also discloses wherein the second duration is less than the first duration minus a short interframe space (SIFs) and minus a time to transmit the CTS [ RTS ] frame ( [ ¶ 0096] : u pon receiving the RTS frame, the receiver responds with a CTS frame which is transmitted SIFS duration following the end of the RTS frame. The CTS frame has a duration field just like the RTS frame. The receiver uses the value in the duration field of the received RTS frame and subtracts from it the time to transmit a CTS frame+one SIFS. The remainder value is used to set the duration field in the CTS frame which is transmitted in response to the RTS frame. ) . Regarding claim 8, Nayak in view of Kneckt discloses all features of claim 1 as outlined above. Nayak also discloses wherein the second duration is no smaller than a sum of: a time to transmit two short interface spaces (SIFs), a time to transmit a data frame, and a time to transmit an acknowledgement frame or block acknowledgement frame ( [ ¶ 0095]: the frame contains a duration field which indicates the duration for transmission of the CTS frame, the data or management frame, the ACK frame and any interframe spacings involved. Consequently, according to the standard, the transmitter sets this value to the duration of the data/management frame+duration of CTS frame+duration of ACK frame+3 SIFS frames.) . Regarding claim 9, Nayak in view of Kneckt discloses all features of claim 1 as outlined above. Nayak also disclose s wherein the processing circuitry is further configured to: set a network allocation vector (NAV) to the reduced second duration ( [¶0096]: RTS/CTS protocol enables to reduce collisions due to hidden terminal scenario as the devices either hear the RTS or the CTS which helps them to set their NAV timer. [ ¶ 0111] In one embodiment, upon non-reception of the CTS frame, to enable other devices on link2 to reset their NAV timers, AP2 can transmit a CF-end frame and release the channel.) . Regarding claim 12, Nayak in view of Kneckt discloses all features of claim 1 as outlined above. Nayak also discloses wherein the processing circuitry is further configured to: determine the transmission will cause interference between the STA and an AP, wherein the RTS frame is received from the AP ( [0003]: f or example, for a WiFi device operating on both 5 GHz and 6 GHz links, transmission on the 6 GHz link may compromise simultaneous reception on a 5 GHz link due to the out-of-band interference/leakage and vice versa. In the context of MLDs, such links are referred to as a non-simultaneous transmit/receive (NSTR) link pair. This causes two main problems. Firstly, if a device is transmitting on one link and the second link is in reception mode, the signal leakage can result in an interference to the ongoing reception on the second link. Secondly, if one a device is transmitting on one link, it may become incapable of sensing the channel occupancy on the second link (due to the interference) to determine if the channel is idle or not. [ ¶ 0093] : t o overcome the problems arising from the signal leakage, the transmission start times and end times on a NSTR link pair are aligned. In the same manner, the reception start times and end times are also aligned to avoid interference from the transmission of the control frame (e.g., Block Ack) that follows the DATA reception. [¶0054]: Current disclosure provides rules and mechanisms for non-AP device behavior when such an NSTR situation arises while under multi-AP association. We shall consider two scenarios: [ ¶ 0055] 1. Scenario1: NSTR condition detected at the MBD before association with AP on both links [ ¶ 0056] 2. Scenario2: NSTR condition detected at the MBD after association with APs on the two links ) . Regarding claim 14, Nayak discloses a non-transitory computer-readable storage medium that stores instructions ( [ ¶ 0010] various functions described below can be implemented or supported by one or more computer programs, each of which is formed from computer readable program code and embodied in a computer readable medium. ) for execution by one or more processors of an apparatus of a station (STA) ( Fig. 2B: STA 111 ) , the instructions to configure the one or more processors to: decode … a request to send (RTS) frame ( Fig. 7, [¶0094]: FIG. 7 illustrates an example of a frame format for the RTS frame 700 . [ ¶ 0095] : RTS/CTS is an 802.11 protocol to reduce frame collisions especially in a hidden terminal scenario. As a part of the procedure, a device with data to send, upon completing its backoff procedure, first transmits an RTS frame. The RTS frame has a format as shown in FIG. 7. ) , the RTS frame comprising an address of the STA ( Fig. 7: RA field ) and a first duration field, the first duration field indicating a first duration ( Fig. 7, [ ¶ 0095] : the RTS frame 700 contains a duration field . ) ; setting a second duration to a duration that ends before the first duration ([ ¶ 0096] : u pon receiving the RTS frame, the receiver responds with a CTS frame which is transmitted SIFS duration following the end of the RTS frame. The CTS frame has a duration field just like the RTS frame. The receiver uses the value in the duration field of the received RTS frame and subtracts from it the time to transmit a CTS frame+one SIFS. The remainder value is used to set the duration field in the CTS frame which is transmitted in response to the RTS frame.) ; and encode, for transmission, a clear-to-send (CTS) frame, the CTS frame comprising a second duration field, the second duration field indicating the second duration ([ ¶ 0096] : t he remainder value is used to set the duration field in the CTS frame which is transmitted in response to the RTS frame. ) . Although Nayak discloses decoding a RTS frame that includes a first duration field, Nayak does not specifically disclose the RTS frame is comprised of a physical layer protocol data unit (PPDU). However, Kneckt discloses to decode a physical layer protocol data unit (PPDU), the PPDU comprising a request to send (RTS) frame ( [ ¶ 0048] : a STA addressed by an MU-RTS frame may transmit a CTS response after the end of the PPDU containing the MU-RTS frame . ) . Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention for the RTS frame that includes a first duration field, as taught by Nayak, to be comprised within a PPDU, as taught by Kneckt . Doing so allows for transmission of data using existing wireless protocols (see Kneckt [¶0032]). Regarding claim 15, Nayak in view of Kneckt discloses all features of claim 14 as outlined above. As discussed above with respect to the rejection of claim 15 under 35 U.S.C. 112(a), the specification does not appear to provide support for the second duration is less than a value, based in part, on minus a time to transmit the RTS frame . For purposes of examination, the Examiner assumes that claim 7 contains a typographical error and is intended to recite “ wherein the second duration is less than the first duration minus a short interframe space (SIFs) and minus a time to transmit the CTS frame . ” Nayak also discloses wherein the second duration ends before a transmission and the second duration is less than the first duration minus a short interframe space (SIFs) and minus a time to transmit the CTS [[ RTS ]] frame ( [ ¶ 0096] : u pon receiving the RTS frame, the receiver responds with a CTS frame which is transmitted SIFS duration following the end of the RTS frame. The CTS frame has a duration field just like the RTS frame. The receiver uses the value in the duration field of the received RTS frame and subtracts from it the time to transmit a CTS frame+one SIFS. The remainder value is used to set the duration field in the CTS frame which is transmitted in response to the RTS frame. ) . Regarding claim 16, Nayak discloses: a n apparatus of an access point (AP) ( Fig. 2A: AP 101 ) , the apparatus comprising memory ( Fig. 2A: memory 2 29 ) ; and processing circuitry ( Fig. 2A: controller/processor 224 ) coupled to the memory, the processing circuitry configured to: encode … a request to send (RTS) frame ( Fig. 7, [¶0094]: FIG. 7 illustrates an example of a frame format for the RTS frame 700 . [ ¶ 0095] : RTS/CTS is an 802.11 protocol to reduce frame collisions especially in a hidden terminal scenario. As a part of the procedure, a device with data to send, upon completing its backoff procedure, first transmits an RTS frame. The RTS frame has a format as shown in FIG. 7. ) , the RTS frame comprising an address of a station (STA) ( Fig. 7: RA field ) and a first duration field ( Fig. 7, [ ¶ 0095] : the RTS frame 700 contains a duration field . ) ; decode a clear-to-send (CTS) frame, the CTS frame comprising a second duration field ([ ¶ 0096] : u pon receiving the RTS frame, the receiver responds with a CTS frame which is transmitted SIFS duration following the end of the RTS frame. The CTS frame has a duration field just like the RTS frame. The receiver uses the value in the duration field of the received RTS frame and subtracts from it the time to transmit a CTS frame+one SIFS. The remainder value is used to set the duration field in the CTS frame which is transmitted in response to the RTS frame. T he remainder value is used to set the duration field in the CTS frame which is transmitted in response to the RTS frame. ) ; and encode for transmission a data frame, wherein a length of the data frame is based on a duration indicated by the second duration field ( [ ¶ 0095] : the frame contains a duration field which indicates the duration for transmission of the CTS frame, the data or management frame, the ACK frame and any interframe spacings involved. Consequently, according to the standard, the transmitter sets this value to the duration of the data/management frame+duration of CTS frame+duration of ACK frame+3 SIFS frames. ) . Although Nayak discloses encoding a RTS frame that includes a first duration field, Nayak does not specifically disclose the RTS frame is comprised of a physical layer protocol data unit (PPDU). However, Kneckt discloses to en code a physical layer protocol data unit (PPDU), the PPDU comprising a request to send (RTS) frame ( [ ¶ 0048] : a STA addressed by an MU-RTS frame may transmit a CTS response after the end of the PPDU containing the MU-RTS frame . ) . Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention for the RTS frame that includes a first duration field, as taught by Nayak, to be comprised within a PPDU, as taught by Kneckt . Doing so allows for transmission of data using existing wireless protocols (see Kneckt [¶0032]). Regarding claim 17, Nayak in view of Kneckt discloses all features of claim 16 as outlined above. Nayak does not explicitly disclose that the CTS frames comprises a receiver address field indicating an address of the AP. address of the AP. However, Kneckt discloses wherein the CTS frame comprises a receiver address field, the receiver address field indicating an address of the AP ( Fig. 3C, [¶0083]: FIG. 3C illustrates a portion of a CTS frame 330. CTS frame 330 may include receiving address field RA 331. ) . Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention for the CTS frame that includes a second duration field, as taught by Nayak, to include an address of the AP, as taught by Kneckt . Doing so allows for the correct AP to receive the CTS from the STA. Regarding claim 18, Nayak in view of Kneckt discloses all features of claim 16 as outlined above. Nayak also discloses wherein the duration indicated by the second duration field is a duration no smaller than a sum of. a time to transmit two short interface spaces (SIFs), a time to transmit a data frame, and a time to transmit an acknowledgement frame or block acknowledgement frame ( [¶0095]: the frame contains a duration field which indicates the duration for transmission of the CTS frame, the data or management frame, the ACK frame and any interframe spacings involved. Consequently, according to the standard, the transmitter sets this value to the duration of the data/management frame+duration of CTS frame+duration of ACK frame+3 SIFS frames.) . Regarding claim 19, Nayak in view of Kneckt discloses all features of claim 16 as outlined above. As discussed above with respect to the rejection of claim 19 under 35 U.S.C. 112(a), the specification does not appear to provide support for the second duration is less than a value, based in part, on minus a time to transmit the RTS frame . For purposes of examination, the Examiner assumes that claim 7 contains a typographical error and is intended to recite “ wherein the second duration is less than the first duration minus a short interframe space (SIFs) and minus a time to transmit the CTS frame . ” Nayak also discloses wherein the second duration is less than the first duration minus a short interframe space (SIFs) and minus a time to transmit the CTS [[RTS]] frame ( [ ¶ 0096] : u pon receiving the RTS frame, the receiver responds with a CTS frame which is transmitted SIFS duration following the end of the RTS frame. The CTS frame has a duration field just like the RTS frame. The receiver uses the value in the duration field of the received RTS frame and subtracts from it the time to transmit a CTS frame+one SIFS. The remainder value is used to set the duration field in the CTS frame which is transmitted in response to the RTS frame. ) . Claim 5 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nayak in view of Kneckt and further in view of Hwang et al. (US 2015/0111610 A 1)( hereinafter “Hwang”). Regarding claim 5, Nayak in view of Kneckt discloses all features of claim 1 as outlined above. Nayak in view of Kneckt does not disclose wherein the transmission is a lower energy transmission. However, Hwang discloses wherein the transmission is a lower energy transmission ([0005] a spects of the present disclosure are directed to apparatuses and methods that can improve Bluetooth (BT) and Wireless Local Area Network (WLAN) coexistence at a BT/WLAN co-located wireless communication device. [0051] In various aspects of the disclosure, the communication device 102 receiving WLAN Rx is configured to communicate suitable information with the AP 110 such that the AP 110 and the device 102 can cooperate to fragment the WLAN data based on BT medium access timing or transmission interval to avoid collision between WLAN and BT traffic.) . Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention for the transmission, as taught by Nayak, to comprise a lower energy transmission, as taught by Hwang. Doing so allows for the coexistence of coexistence of Bluetooth and WLAN communication within the communication system (See Hwang [¶0003]). Claim s 13 and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nayak in view of Kneckt and further in view of Fang et al. ( US 2019 / 0045461 A 1 )( hereinafter “Fang”). Regarding claim 13, Nayak in view of Kneckt discloses all features of claim 1 as outlined above. Nayak also discloses further comprising transceiver circuitry ( Fig. 2B: RF transceiver 210 ) coupled to the processing circuitry ( Fig. 2B: processor 2 4 0) , the transceiver circuitry ( Fig. 2B: RF transceiver 210 ) coupled to two or more [ microstrip ] antennas ( Fig. 2B: antenna(s) 205 ) for receiving signaling in accordance with a multiple-input multiple-output (MIMO) technique ( [¶0052]: i n particular examples, the STA 111 may include any number of antenna(s) 205 for MIMO communication with an AP 101.) , or transceiver circuitry ( Fig. 2B: RF transceiver 210 ) coupled to the processing circuitry, the transceiver circuitry ( Fig. 2B: RF transceiver 210 ) coupled to two or more [[ patch ] antennas ( Fig. 2B: antenna(s) 205 ) for receiving signalling in accordance with a multiple-input multiple-output (MIMO) technique (( [¶0052]: i n particular examples, the STA 111 may include any number of antenna(s) 205 for MIMO communication with an AP 101.)) . Nayak fails to disclose that the two or more antennas are microstrip antennas or patch antennas. However, Fang discloses the transceiver circuitry coupled to two or more microstrip antennas for receiving signaling in accordance with a multiple-input multiple-output (MIMO) technique or transceiver circuitry coupled to two or more patch antennas for receiving signalling in accordance with a multiple-input multiple-output (MIMO) technique ([0106] t he antennas 712 … may comprise one or more directional or omnidirectional antennas, including, for example, … patch antennas, … microstrip antennas or other types of antennas suitable for transmission of RF signals. In some multiple-input multiple-output (MIMO) embodiments, the antennas 712 may be effectively separated to take advantage of spatial diversity and the different channel characteristics that may result) . Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention for the antennas for receiving signaling in accordance with a MIMO technique, as taught by Nayak, to include microstrip or patch antennas, as taught by Fang. Doing so allows for taking advantage of spatial diversity and different channel characteristics within the communication system (See Fang [¶0106]). Regarding claim 20, Nayak in view of Kneckt discloses all features of claim 16 as outlined above. Nayak also discloses further comprising transceiver circuitry ( Fig. 2B: RF transceiver 210 ) coupled to the processing circuitry ( Fig. 2B: processor 2 4 0) , the transceiver circuitry ( Fig. 2B: RF transceiver 210 ) coupled to two or more [[ patch ]] antennas ( Fig. 2B: antenna(s) 205 ) for receiving signalling in accordance with a multiple-input multiple- output (MIMO) technique ( [¶0052]: i n particular examples, the STA 111 may include any number of antenna(s) 205 for MIMO communication with an AP 101.) . Nayak fails to disclose that the two or more antennas are patch antennas. However, Fang discloses the transceiver circuitry coupled to two or more patch antennas for receiving signalling in accordance with a multiple-input multiple-output (MIMO) technique ([0106] t he antennas 712 … may comprise one or more directional or omnidirectional antennas, including, for example, … patch antennas, … or other types of antennas suitable for transmission of RF signals. In some multiple-input multiple-output (MIMO) embodiments, the antennas 712 may be effectively separated to take advantage of spatial diversity and the different channel characteristics that may result) . Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention for the antennas for receiving signaling in accordance with a MIMO technique, as taught by Nayak, to include patch antennas, as taught by Fang. Doing so allows for taking advantage of spatial diversity and different channel characteristics within the communication system (See Fang [¶0106]). Conclusion The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Luo et al. (US 20250227756 A1) – discloses that the duration value of the RTS frame (in microseconds) represents the time required for completing exchange of the CTS frame, the data frame, and the acknowledge frame and three short interframe spaces (SIFS). The duration value of the CTS frame (in microseconds) represents the time required for completing exchange of the data frame and the acknowledge frame and two SIFS (See Luo [¶0050]) . Kwon et al. ( US 20150172025 A1 ) – discloses an RTS frame containing a duration field with the total frame transmission time accounting for SIFS, a CTS frame, a downlink data frame, and an acknowledgement frame (See Kwon [¶0035]) . Also discloses that t he duration field in the CTS frame is calculated based on the duration field from the received RTS frame adjusted by subtracting the time of transmission of the CTS frame and adding the time to transmit the data frame from the sender of the CTS frame (See Kwon [¶0037]) . Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to FILLIN "Examiner name" \* MERGEFORMAT MICHAEL W MADDOX whose telephone number is FILLIN "Phone number" \* MERGEFORMAT (571)272-5834 . The examiner can normally be reached FILLIN "Work Schedule?" \* MERGEFORMAT M-Th 7:30am-5:00pm, 1st F 7:30am-4:00pm, 2nd F off . 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, FILLIN "SPE Name?" \* MERGEFORMAT Asad M Nawaz can be reached at FILLIN "SPE Phone?" \* MERGEFORMAT 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. /MICHAEL WAYNE MADDOX/ Examiner, Art Unit 2463 /ASAD M NAWAZ/ Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2463