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
This communication is in response to amendment filed on 11/18/2025. Claims 1, 3-10, 14-20 are pending.
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.
Claims 1, 3-10, 14-20 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 and 18 recite “the indication information of BSR collection is set to indicate that an access point (AP) intends to receive BSRs of multiple traffic identifiers (TIDs) carried in a physical layer protocol data unit (PPDU) responding to the BSRP trigger frame.” This limitation does not have support in the specification.
The specification (paragraphs 25-29) discloses an access point (AP) sends BSRP trigger frame with indication information. The indication information is set to indicate that the AP intends to collect BSRs of multiple TIDs. There is no teaching of the multiple traffic identifiers (TIDs) have to be carried in a physical layer protocol data unit (PPDU) in the indication information, i.e., the indication information does not indicate PPDU. Thus, the limitation is deemed to contain new subject matter.
Claims 3-9 and 19-20 are rejected for their dependency of claims 1 and 18 above.
Claim 10 recites “wherein the BSRP trigger frame intends to collect buffer status report (BSR).” This limitation does not have support in the specification. The specification discloses an access point intends to collect buffer status report. A trigger frame, a signal, does not have capability to “intends to collect buffer status report.” In another word, the spec does not teach a signal to collect other signals.
Claims 14-17 are rejected for their dependency of claim 10 above.
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, 3, 5, and 18-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Xin et al. (US Pub. No. 2023/0117842) in view of Chu et al. (US Pub. No. 2021/0227529).
Regarding claims 1, Xin discloses a wireless communication method comprising: generating a buffer status report poll (BSRP) trigger frame (figure 15 step 352 and figures 16-19; paragraphs 131, 137, and 155: AP1 sends a BSRP trigger frame to request STA2 to report buffer status of TID6 with QoS status and to request STA3 to report buffer status of TID4 and TID5), wherein the BSRP trigger frame is configured to carry indication information of buffer status report (BSR) collection (paragraph 155: AP1 sends a BSRP trigger frame to request STA2 to report buffer status of TID6 with QoS status and to request STA3 to report buffer status of TID4 and TID5); and the indication information of BSR collection is set to indicate that an access point (AP) intends to receive BSRs of multiple traffic identifiers (TIDs) responding to the BSRP trigger frame (figure 15 step 352 and figures 16-19; paragraphs 131, 137, and 155: the indication in BSRP trigger frame indicates AP1 requests and intends to receive BSRs of STA2 with TID6 and STA3 of TID4 and TID5 in response to the BSRP trigger frame); and
sending the BSRP trigger frame to at least one non-access-point (non-AP) station (STA) (see figures 15-19 first steps, paragraphs 131, 137, and 155).
Xin further discloses STAs, in response to the BSRP trigger frame, transmits BSRs with multiples TIDS in a triggered based (TB) Physical Layer Protocol Data Unit (PPDU) (paragraphs 32, 33, and 153-158).
Xin does not disclose indication information is set to indicate responding information carried in a Physical Layer Protocol Data Unit (PPDU).
In the same field of endeavor, Chu discloses indication information is set to indicate responding information carried in a Physical Layer Protocol Data Unit (PPDU) (figures 4A, 4B, and 4C; abstract, paragraphs 3, 57, 65-67: first device transmits to a second device , a trigger frame that solicits at least one Physical layer Protocol Unit (PPDU) for uplink transmission. Paragraph 57: an enhanced BSRP trigger for soliciting an TB PPDU).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to implement in Xin indication information is set to indicate responding information carried in a Physical Layer Protocol Data Unit (PPDU).
The motivation would have been for frame format indication (paragraph 2)
Claim 18 is rejected similarly as claim 1 above. Xin further teaches a wireless communication circuit and a control circuit (see figure 8 CPU and RFs circuits).
Regarding claim 3, all limitations of claim 1 are disclosed above. Xin further teaches the indication information of BSR collection is set to further specify which TIDs are requested by the AP (paragraph 155: AP1 sends a BSRP trigger frame to request STA2 to report buffer status of TID6 with QoS status and to request STA3 to report buffer status of TID4 and TID5).
Regarding claim 5, all limitations of claim 3 are disclosed above. Xin further teaches sending the BSRP trigger frame to at least one non-AP STA comprises: sending the BSRP trigger frame to multiple non-AP STAs (see figures 15-19: AP1 sends BSRP to STA2 and STA3), wherein the multiple non-AP STAs comprise a first non-AP STA and a second non-AP STA (see figures 15-19: AP1 sends BSRP to STA2 and STA3); wherein in accordance with the indication information of BSR collection, requested TIDs of the first non-AP STA are different from requested TIDs of the second non-AP STA (paragraph 155: AP1 sends a BSRP trigger frame to request STA2 to report buffer status of TID6 with QoS status and to request STA3 to report buffer status of TID4 and TID5).
Regarding claim 19, all limitations of claim 18 are disclosed above. Xin further teaches receive at least one trigger-based (TB) physical layer (PHY) protocol data unit (PPDU) through the wireless communication circuit, and said at least one TB PPDU is sent from said at least one non-AP STA in response to the BSRP trigger frame (see figure 19 718 and 720; paragraphs 32, 33 in view of paragraphs 156, 157).
Regarding claim 20, all limitations of claim 18 are disclosed above. Xin further teaches wherein each of said at least one TB PPDU includes an aggregated media access control (MAC) protocol data unit (A-MPDU) carrying multiple quality of service (QoS) null frames, each having a MAC header that carries a BSR of a specific traffic identifier (TID) (paragraphs 32, 33 in view of paragraphs 156, 157, 161: BSRP trigger frame requests BSRs from non-AP STA which include QoS Null frames in an Aggregate MAC Protocol Data Unit (A-MPDU) to report buffer status for different TIDs).
Claim(s) 4 and 6 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Xin et al. (US Pub. No. 2023/0117842) in view of Chu et al. (US Pub. No. 2021/0227529) in view of Lou et al. (US Pub. No. 2025/0048428).
Regarding claim 4, all limitations of claim 3 are disclosed above. Xin further teaches sending the BSRP trigger frame to at least one non-AP STA comprises: sending the BSRP trigger frame to multiple non-AP STAs (see figures 15-19: AP1 sends BSRP to STA2 and STA3), wherein the multiple non-AP STAs comprise a first non-AP STA and a second non-AP STA (see figures 15-19: AP1 sends BSRP to STA2 and STA3).
Xin does not teach but Lou discloses wherein in accordance with the indication information of BSR collection, requested TIDs of the first non-AP STA are the same as requested TIDs of the second non-AP STA (paragraph 134: TID subfield may be used to indicate the buffer status of low latency traffic and TIDs indicated in TID bitmap).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to implement in Xin wherein in accordance with the indication information of BSR collection, requested TIDs of the first non-AP STA are the same as requested TIDs of the second non-AP STA.
The motivation would have been have BSR reports of the same type of traffic.
Regarding claim 6, all limitations of claim 1 are disclosed above. Xin does not teach but Lou discloses the indication information of BSR collection comprises a single bit that is set to indicate that BSRs of all TIDs are requested by the AP (paragraph 134: Delta TID subfield is a value of 0 may be used to indicate buffer status of low latency traffic and TIDs indicated in the TID bitmap may be included in the BSR report).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to implement in Xin the indication information of BSR collection comprises a single bit that is set to indicate that BSRs of all TIDs are requested by the AP.
The motivation would have been for predefined combination.
Claim(s) 7-9 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Xin et al. (US Pub. No. 2023/0117842) in view of Chu et al. (US Pub. No. 2021/0227529) in view of Ahn et al. (Us Pub. No. 2019/0319738).
Regarding claim 7, all limitations of claim 1 are disclosed above. Chu discloses PPDU information (paragraph 57). Xin does not teach but Ahn discloses the indication information of BSR collection is set to indicate that the AP is capable of receiving BSRs of multiple traffic identifiers (TIDs) in an aggregated media access control (MAC) protocol data unit (A-MPDU) (paragraphs 183, 184, and 190: The AP may use the trigger frame to indicate information on the type of an MPDU included in the A-MPDU to be transmitted to the AP by the wireless communication terminal. Trigger frame also indicate maximum number of TIDs).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to implement in Xin and Chu the indication information of BSR collection is set to indicate that the AP is capable of receiving BSRs of multiple traffic identifiers (TIDs) in an aggregated media access control (MAC) protocol data unit (A-MPDU).
The motivation would have been to set limit on the responding frame from mobile station.
Regarding claim 8, all limitations of claim 1 are disclosed above. Xin further teaches the indication information of BSR collection is set to indicate which response format is used (paragraphs 183, 184, and 190, 194: frame format).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to implement in Xin the indication information of BSR collection is set to indicate which response format is used.
The motivation would have been for combability.
Regarding claim 9, all limitations of claim 8 are disclosed above. Xin further teaches a response format the use of an aggregated media access control (MAC) protocol data unit (A-MPDU) carrying multiple quality of service null frames, each having a MAC header that carries a BSR of a specific traffic identifier (TID) (paragraphs 32, 33 in view of paragraph 161: BSRP trigger frame requests BSRs from non-AP STA which include QoS Null frames in an Aggregate MAC Protocol Data Unit (A-MPDU) to report buffer status for different TIDs).
Xin does not teach but Ahn discloses the response format indicated by the indication information of BSR collection (paragraphs 183, 194 and 200).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to implement in Xin discloses the response format indicated by the indication information of BSR collection.
The motivation would have been for combability.
Claim(s) 10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Xin et al. (US Pub. No. 2023/0117842) in view of Huang et al. (US Pub. No. 2024/0155717) in view of Chu et al. (US Pub. No. 2022/0022087).
Regarding claims 10, Xin discloses a wireless communication method (figures 15-19; paragraphs 131, 137, and 155) comprising:
receiving a buffer status report poll (BSRP) trigger frame, wherein
the BSRP trigger frame intends to collect buffer status report (BSR) (figure 15 step 352 and figures 16-19; paragraphs 131, 137, and 155: AP1 sends a BSRP trigger frame to request STA2 to report buffer status of TID6 with QoS status and to request STA3 to report buffer status of TID4 and TID5); and
in response to receiving the BSRP trigger frame, generating at least one trigger-based (TB) physical layer (PHY) protocol data unit (PPDU) (figure 19 718 and 720; paragraph 30, 32, 156, and 157: STA2 and STA3 sends two respective frames in the TB PPDU in response to BSPR trigger frame) , and
sending said at least one TB PPDU to an access point (AP) (figure 19 718 and 720; paragraph 30, 32, 156, and 157: STA2 and STA3 sends two frames in the TB PPDU in response to BSPR trigger frame);
Xin does not teach a BSR of at least one TID in a frame body.
In the same field of buffer report, Huang discloses a buffer report in a frame body of a MAC management frame (paragraph 303).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to implement in Xin a BSR of at least one TID in a frame body.
The motivation would have been for large(r) buffer size data indication.
Huang further discloses TID-to-link mapping relationship in paragraph 325.
Xin do not teach a MAC frame without traffic identifier (TID) in a MAC header.
In the same field of management frame, Chu discloses a MAC frame without traffic identifier (TID) in a MAC header (paragraphs 50 and 53; see figure 2: TID-to-link mapping 212-5b is within frame body 212 and not in the MAC header).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to implement in implement in Xin a MAC frame without traffic identifier (TID) in a MAC header.
The motivation would have been for extended frame information.
Claim(s) 16 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Xin et al. (US Pub. No. 2023/0117842) in view of Huang et al. (US Pub. No. 2024/0155717) in view of Chu et al. (US Pub. No. 2022/0022087) in view of Lou et al. (US Pub. No. 2025/0048428) in view of Wiberg et al. (US Pub. No. 2014/0079011).
Regarding claim 16, all limitations of claim 10 are disclosed above. Xin does not teach but Lou discloses the trigger frame indicates that BSRs of all traffic identifiers (TIDs) are requested by the AP (paragraph 134: Delta TID subfield is a value of 0 may be used to indicate buffer status of low latency traffic and TIDs indicated in the TID bitmap may be included in the BSR report).
Xin does not teach but Wiberg discloses in response to an empty buffer of a specific TID, a BSR of the specific TID is skipped in said at least one TB PPDU (paragraph 161: MAC BSR control element is omitted if buffer is empty).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to implement in Xin in response to an empty buffer of a specific TID, a BSR of the specific TID is skipped in said at least one TB PPDU.
The motivation would have been for predefined agreement.
Claim(s) 17 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Xin et al. (US Pub. No. 2023/0117842) in view of Huang et al. (US Pub. No. 2024/0155717) in view of Chu et al. (US Pub. No. 2022/0022087) in view of Lou et al. (US Pub. No. 2025/0048428) in view of Xin et al. (US Pub. No. 2023/0047705), hereinafter Xin 2.
Regarding claim 17, all limitations of claim 10 are disclosed above. Xin does not teach but Lou discloses the trigger frame indicate that BSRs of all TIDs are requested by the AP (paragraph 134: Delta TID subfield is a value of 0 may be used to indicate buffer status of low latency traffic and TIDs indicated in the TID bitmap may be included in the BSR report).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to implement in Xin the trigger frame indicates that BSRs of all TIDs are requested by the AP.
The motivation would have been for predefined combination.
Xin does not teach but Xin 2 discloses in response to empty buffers of all TIDs, only a single BSR that indicates a zero buffer size of a specific TID is reported via said at least one TB PPDU (paragraphs 295, 324, and 325: UL PPDU contains the BSR which indicates the buffer is empty).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to implement in Xin in response to empty buffers of all TIDs, only a single BSR that indicates a zero buffer size of a specific TID is reported via said at least one TB PPDU.
The motivation would have been for channel contention (paragraph 325).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 14 and 15 would be allowable if rewritten to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), 1st paragraph, set forth in this Office action and to include all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
With regards to claims 14 and 15, elements of a MAC frame body carries plurality a BSR control subfield and a plurality of Per TID BSR subfields, the BSR control subfield indicates which TIDs are presented in the plurality of Per TID BSR subfields and each of the plurality of Per TID BSR subfields comprises a buffer size subfield and a scaling factor subfield, are not found in the art.
Even if they are found, it would invariably require impermissible hindsight reasoning due to the numbers and verities of references required and the content in which the limitations are recited in the dependent claims.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 11/18/2025 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
In pages 6-7 of Remark, regarding independent claims 1 and 18, the Applicant argues that Xin does anticipate limitations "the indication information of BSR collection is set to indicate that an access point (AP) intends to receive BSRs of multiple traffic identifiers (TIDs) carried in a physical layer protocol data unit (PPDU) responding to the BSRP trigger frame."
Examiner notes that a newly discovered reference, Chu, in combination with Xin, disclose the claimed limitations. See 35 U.S.C. 103 section above.
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim10 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.
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 TITO Q PHAM whose telephone number is (571)272-4122. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday: 9AM-6PM EST.
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, Faruk Hamza can be reached at 571-272-7969. 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.
/TITO Q PHAM/Examiner, Art Unit 2466
/FARUK HAMZA/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2466