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 claims 1, 14, and 16 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
The objections to the abstract and claims are withdrawn in view of the amendments made thereto.
Specification
The specification is objected to as failing to provide proper antecedent basis for the claimed subject matter. See 37 CFR 1.75(d)(1) and MPEP § 608.01(o). Correction of the following is required:
Claims 1, 14, and 16 as amended recite 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 CTS frame”. However, the specification does not appear to provide support for the second duration being less than the first duration minus a short interframe space (SIFs) and minus a time to transmit the CTS frame. Instead, the specification discloses that the second duration may be equal to the first duration minus a short interframe space (SIFs) and minus a time to transmit the CTS frame. For example, [00114] of the specification recites:
[00114] Wireless devices such destination 904 and other 906 within the transmission range of the source 902 set their NAVs to the end of the NAV (RTS) 924, which includes time for the ACK 922, in response to the receiving and decoding the RTS 910 frame. The Duration 1306 field is set to the value obtained from the Duration 1206 field of the immediately previous RTS 910 frame, minus the time, in microseconds, required to transmit the CTS 914 frame and its SIFS 912.
Accordingly, the specification provides support setting the second duration to being equal to the first duration minus a short interframe space (SIFs) and minus a time to transmit the CTS frame. However, the specification as originally filed does not appear to provide adequate support for setting the second duration to being less than the first duration minus a short interframe space (SIFs) and minus a time to transmit the CTS frame as claimed.
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 1, 14, and 16 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 written description requirement. The claim(s) 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.
Claims 1, 14, and 16 as amended recite 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 CTS frame”. However, the specification does not appear to provide support for the second duration being less than the first duration minus a short interframe space (SIFs) and minus a time to transmit the CTS frame. Instead, the specification discloses that the second duration may be equal to the first duration minus a short interframe space (SIFs) and minus a time to transmit the CTS frame. For example, [00114] of the specification recites:
[00114] Wireless devices such destination 904 and other 906 within the transmission range of the source 902 set their NAVs to the end of the NAV (RTS) 924, which includes time for the ACK 922, in response to the receiving and decoding the RTS 910 frame. The Duration 1306 field is set to the value obtained from the Duration 1206 field of the immediately previous RTS 910 frame, minus the time, in microseconds, required to transmit the CTS 914 frame and its SIFS 912.
Accordingly, the specification provides support setting the second duration to being equal to the first duration minus a short interframe space (SIFs) and minus a time to transmit the CTS frame. However, the specification as originally filed does not appear to provide adequate support for setting the second duration to being less than the first duration minus a short interframe space (SIFs) and minus a time to transmit the CTS frame as claimed.
Claims 1, 14, and 16 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.
Claims 1, 14, and 16 as amended recite 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 CTS frame”. However, the specification does not appear to provide support for the second duration being less than the first duration minus a short interframe space (SIFs) and minus a time to transmit the CTS frame. Instead, the specification discloses that the second duration may be equal to the first duration minus a short interframe space (SIFs) and minus a time to transmit the CTS frame. For example, [00114] of the specification recites:
[00114] Wireless devices such destination 904 and other 906 within the transmission range of the source 902 set their NAVs to the end of the NAV (RTS) 924, which includes time for the ACK 922, in response to the receiving and decoding the RTS 910 frame. The Duration 1306 field is set to the value obtained from the Duration 1206 field of the immediately previous RTS 910 frame, minus the time, in microseconds, required to transmit the CTS 914 frame and its SIFS 912.
Accordingly, the specification provides support setting the second duration to being equal to the first duration minus a short interframe space (SIFs) and minus a time to transmit the CTS frame. However, the specification as originally filed does not appear to provide adequate support for setting the second duration to being less than the first duration minus a short interframe space (SIFs) and minus a time to transmit the CTS frame as claimed.
The Specification does not teach one of ordinary skill in the art how to make and use the full scope of the claimed invention without "undue experimentation." MPEP 2161.01(III). In considering the "Wands" factors, it is determined that based on (i) the broadness of the claim language of claims 1, 14, and 16; (ii) the nature of the invention; (iii) the state of the prior art; (iv) the level of one of ordinary skill; (v) the amount of direction provided by the inventor, which is minimal with regard to the limitation above; (vi) the non-existence of working examples; and (vii) the considerable quantity of experimentation needed to make or use the invention based on the content of the disclosure, the Specification does not enable one of ordinary skill in the art to practice the limitation set forth above.
Dependent claims 2-6, 8-13, and 17-21 are rejected as being dependent upon rejected claims 1 and 16.
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.
Claims 1-4, 6, 8-9, 12, and 14, and 16-19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nayak et al. (US 2023/0073868 A1)(hereinafter “Nayak”) in view of Kneckt et al. (US 2017/0257888 A1) (hereinafter “Kneckt”) and further in view of Fischer (US 2021/0195540 A1)(hereinafter “Fischer”).
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 240) 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.);
set a second duration to a duration that ends before an end of the first duration ([¶0096]: upon 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 to or by the STA, the transmission of a clear-to-send (CTS) frame ([0093] to 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, the CTS frame, the CTS frame comprising a second duration field, the second duration field indicating the second duration ([¶0096]: the 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]).
Nayak also discloses wherein the second duration is equal to [less than] the first duration minus a short interframe space (SIFs) and minus a time to transmit the CTS [RTS] frame ([¶0096]: upon 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.). Nayak does not appear to explicitly disclose 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. However, Fischer 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 frame ([0180]: in aspects of the disclosure, RTS CTS exchange mechanisms are provided. For example, STA receiving CTS in response to RTS, where if CTS DUR value is less than expected according to the standard rule of RTS DUR−SIFS−CTS_duration, then RTS transmitter restricts duration of PPDU following CTS to the duration specified in the CTS or RTS transmitter restricts duration of PPDU following CTS plus expected BA PPDU to the duration specified in the CTS. As another example, STA receiving CTA in response to RTS uses information provided in CTA to determine next PPDU transmission parameters and to set the next-next PPDU duration parameter in the next PPDU. Accordingly, Fischer discloses that a CTS duration value may be set of a value that is less than the duration of the RTS minus the short interframe space (SIFs) and minus the time to transmit the CTS 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 CTS frame duration frame, as taught by Nayak, to be less than the duration of the RTS minus the short interframe space (SIFs) and minus the time to transmit the CTS frame, as taught by Fischer. Doing so allows for increasing transmission efficiency by allowing for more frequent data transmissions due to the decreased duration.
Regarding claim 2, Nayak in view of Kneckt and further in view of Fischer 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]: in 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 and further in view of Fischer discloses all features of claim 3 as outlined above.
Nayak also discloses also wherein the transmission is a scheduled transmission 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 service 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 and further in view of Fischer discloses all features of claim 1 as outlined above.
Nayak also discloses wherein the PPDU is received on a first transmission band and wherein the scheduled transmission is on a second transmission band ([¶0005]: in 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. [0100]: a non-AP WiFi device can be equipped with multiple stations (STAs) each capable of operating on a different frequency band simultaneously.).
Regarding claim 6, Nayak in view of Kneckt and further in view of Fischer 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 service 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 8, Nayak in view of Kneckt and further in view of Fischer 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 and further in view of Fischer discloses all features of claim 1 as outlined above.
Nayak also discloses wherein the processing circuitry is further configured to: set a network allocation vector (NAV) to the 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 and further in view of Fischer 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]: for 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]: to 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.);
set a second duration to a duration that ends before an end of the first duration ([¶0096]: upon 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 to or by the STA, the transmission of a clear-to-send (CTS) frame ([0093] to 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, the CTS frame, the CTS frame comprising a second duration field, the second duration field indicating the second duration ([¶0096]: the 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]).
Nayak also discloses wherein the second duration is equal to [less than] the first duration minus a short interframe space (SIFs) and minus a time to transmit the CTS [RTS] frame ([¶0096]: upon 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.). Nayak does not appear to explicitly disclose 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. However, Fischer 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 frame ([0180]: in aspects of the disclosure, RTS CTS exchange mechanisms are provided. For example, STA receiving CTS in response to RTS, where if CTS DUR value is less than expected according to the standard rule of RTS DUR−SIFS−CTS_duration, then RTS transmitter restricts duration of PPDU following CTS to the duration specified in the CTS or RTS transmitter restricts duration of PPDU following CTS plus expected BA PPDU to the duration specified in the CTS. As another example, STA receiving CTA in response to RTS uses information provided in CTA to determine next PPDU transmission parameters and to set the next-next PPDU duration parameter in the next PPDU. Accordingly, Fischer discloses that a CTS duration value may be set of a value that is less than the duration of the RTS minus the short interframe space (SIFs) and minus the time to transmit the CTS 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 CTS frame duration frame, as taught by Nayak, to be less than the duration of the RTS minus the short interframe space (SIFs) and minus the time to transmit the CTS frame, as taught by Fischer. Doing so allows for increasing transmission efficiency by allowing for more frequent data transmissions due to the decreased duration.
Regarding claim 16, Nayak discloses: an apparatus of an access point (AP) (Fig. 2A: AP 101), the apparatus comprising memory (Fig. 2A: memory 229); 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]: upon 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. 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 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 encode 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]).
Nayak also discloses wherein the second duration is equal to [less than] the first duration minus a short interframe space (SIFs) and minus a time to transmit the CTS [RTS] frame ([¶0096]: upon 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.). Nayak does not appear to explicitly disclose 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. However, Fischer 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 frame ([0180]: in aspects of the disclosure, RTS CTS exchange mechanisms are provided. For example, STA receiving CTS in response to RTS, where if CTS DUR value is less than expected according to the standard rule of RTS DUR−SIFS−CTS_duration, then RTS transmitter restricts duration of PPDU following CTS to the duration specified in the CTS or RTS transmitter restricts duration of PPDU following CTS plus expected BA PPDU to the duration specified in the CTS. As another example, STA receiving CTA in response to RTS uses information provided in CTA to determine next PPDU transmission parameters and to set the next-next PPDU duration parameter in the next PPDU. Accordingly, Fischer discloses that a CTS duration value may be set of a value that is less than the duration of the RTS minus the short interframe space (SIFs) and minus the time to transmit the CTS 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 CTS frame duration frame, as taught by Nayak, to be less than the duration of the RTS minus the short interframe space (SIFs) and minus the time to transmit the CTS frame, as taught by Fischer. Doing so allows for increasing transmission efficiency by allowing for more frequent data transmissions due to the decreased duration.
Regarding claim 17, Nayak in view of Kneckt and further in view of Fischer 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 and further in view of Fischer 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 and further in view of Fischer discloses all features of claim 16 as outlined above.
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 frame ([¶0096]: upon 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.).
Claims 5 and 21 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nayak in view of Kneckt and further in view of Fischer, and still further in view of Hwang et al. (US 2015/0111610 A1)(hereinafter “Hwang”).
Regarding claim 5, Nayak in view of Kneckt and further in view of Fischer discloses all features of claim 1 as outlined above.
Nayak in view of Kneckt and further in view of Fischer does not disclose wherein the transmission is transmitted using a first wireless communication standard using lower energy than a second wireless communication standard used to transmit the CTS frame. However, Hwang discloses wherein the transmission is transmitted using a first wireless communication standard using lower energy than a second wireless communication standard used to transmit the CTS frame ([0005] aspects 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 using the wireless standard used to transmit the CTS frame, as taught by Nayak, to comprise a wireless communication standard using lower energy, as taught by Hwang. Doing so allows for the coexistence of Bluetooth and WLAN communication within the communication system (See Hwang [¶0003]).
Regarding claim 21, Nayak in view of Kneckt and further in view of Fischer, and still further in view of Hwang discloses all features of claim 5 as outlined above.
Nayak also discloses wherein…the second wireless communication standard is Institute of Electrical and Electronic Engineers (IEEE) 802.11 ([0054]: In mode 1, the device operates as a non-AP MLD (as defined in 802.11be). Nayak does not disclose wherein the first wireless communication standard is Bluetooth®. However, Hwang further discloses wherein the first wireless communication standard is Bluetooth® and the second wireless communication standard is Institute of Electrical and Electronic Engineers (IEEE) 802.11 ([0005] aspects 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 to communicate a transmission using a 802.11 wireless communication standard, as taught by Nayak, to utilize a Bluetooth wireless communication standard to communicate another transmission, as taught by Hwang. Doing so allows for the coexistence of Bluetooth and WLAN communication within the communication system (See Hwang [¶0003]).
Claims 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 Fischer, and still further in view of Fang et al. (US 2019/0045461 A1)(hereinafter “Fang”).
Regarding claim 13, Nayak in view of Kneckt and further in view of Fischer 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 240), 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]: in 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]: in 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] the 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 and further in view of Fischer 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 240), 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]: in 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] the 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
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 MICHAEL W MADDOX whose telephone number is (571)272-5834. The examiner can normally be reached 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, Asad M Nawaz can be reached at 571-272-3988. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of published or unpublished applications may be obtained from Patent Center. Unpublished application information in Patent Center is available to registered users. To file and manage patent submissions in Patent Center, visit: https://patentcenter.uspto.gov. Visit https://www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/patent-center for more information about Patent Center and https://www.uspto.gov/patents/docx for information about filing in DOCX format. For additional questions, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/MICHAEL WAYNE MADDOX/Examiner, Art Unit 2463
/CHI TANG P CHENG/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2463
Prosecution Insights