DETAILED ACTION
In view of the Appeal Brief filed on 04/07/2026, PROSECUTION IS HEREBY REOPENED. New grounds of rejection are set forth below.
To avoid abandonment of the application, appellant must exercise one of the following two options:
(1) file a reply under 37 CFR 1.111 (if this Office action is non-final) or a reply under 37 CFR 1.113 (if this Office action is final); or,
(2) initiate a new appeal by filing a notice of appeal under 37 CFR 41.31 followed by an appeal brief under 37 CFR 41.37. The previously paid notice of appeal fee and appeal brief fee can be applied to the new appeal. If, however, the appeal fees set forth in 37 CFR 41.20 have been increased since they were previously paid, then appellant must pay the difference between the increased fees and the amount previously paid.
A Supervisory Patent Examiner (SPE) has approved of reopening prosecution by signing below:
Sujoy K Kundu
This Non-Final Office Action is in response to application number 18/164,787 filed on February 6th 2023. The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Information Disclosure Statements
The Information Disclosure Statements (IDS), submitted on August 17th 2023 and February 9th 2023 are in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement has been considered by the examiner.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent may not be obtained though the invention is not identically disclosed or described as set forth in section 102 of this title, if the differences between the subject matter sought to be patented and the prior art are such that the subject matter as a whole would have been obvious at the time the invention was made to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which said subject matter pertains. Patentability shall not be negatived by the manner in which the invention was made.
Claims 1-5, 7-8,11-12 and 18-21 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Guo et al. (WO 2023066181 A1 translation used EP 4422323A1) in view of Min et al. (US 20170055284 A1).
Regarding claims 1 and 12, Guo et al. disclose a method, comprising: at an access point (AP) multi-link device (MLD) (AP MLD) (EP 4422323A1 Paragraph 0308 and FIG. 14 disclose the AP MLD): providing a plurality of links (EP 4422323A1 Paragraph 0296 and FIG. 14 disclose multiple links, links 1-3); establishing communication with a non-access point MLD (non-AP MLD) according to a first mapping between a plurality of traffic identifiers (TIDs) and the plurality of links, the first mapping specifying that respective TIDs of the plurality of TIDs are mapped to at least respective subsets of the plurality of links (EP 4422323A1 Paragraph 0296,0308 and FIG. 14 disclose the establishment of the connection between AP MLD and the non AP MLD. Additionally disclosed is the mapping of TIDs to links. “…the AP multi-link device may indicate a TID that is mapped to each link in a link 1 to a link 3 and that is determined by the AP multi-link device.” “…the AP multi-link device may connect the link 1 and the corresponding TID 1.”);
Guo et al. fail to explicitly disclose transmitting, to the non-AP MLD, an indication of a first guideline for use of a first link of the plurality of links; performing an exchange of data with the non-AP MLD using the first link; and determining whether the exchange of data is consistent with the first guideline for use of the first link.
However, in an analogous art Min et al. teaches transmitting, to the non-AP MLD, an indication of a first guideline for use of a first link of the plurality of links; performing an exchange of data with the non-AP MLD using the first link (Paragraph 0038 discloses “At operation 508, the AP may calculate the optimal radio configurations for each of the uplink and downlink transmissions for each STA in which full-duplex communications are to occur. The radio configurations may include, for example, transmit power and modulation and coding scheme (MCS) for transmissions by each of the STA and AP. In some embodiments, the radio configuration may be stored in some or all of the STAs. In some embodiments, the radio configuration may be provided to at least one of the STAs by the AP immediately prior to the initiation of each full-duplex communication session with that STA or may be provided to the STA some time prior to the full-duplex communication session (e.g., when the STA attaches to the AP) and may further be periodically updated. For example, the radio configuration of a particular STA may be periodically updated as the channel conditions change (e.g., interference is detected on one or more channels/sets of sub-carriers) or as a new STA attaches to the AP, e.g., if the particular STA has a higher priority level than the STA. In some embodiments, the radio configuration of a particular STA may be optimized to minimize the transmission time for at least one full-duplex (uplink or downlink) link for the particular STA. In some embodiments, the radio configuration of a particular STA may be optimized to minimize at least one of the uplink and downlink transmission time across transmissions of the STAs in communication with the AP.” – Examiner Note: Guo discloses the non-AP MLD); and determining whether the exchange of data is consistent with the first guideline for use of the first link (Paragraph 0039 discloses “At operation 510, the expected transmission time for each full-duplex link of the STA may be calculated using the optimal radio configurations for that STA. Assuming a unit bandwidth of 2 MHz (BW.sub.2MHz), which might be the basic resource unit in the IEEE 802.11ax standard, the AP may calculate the expected transmission time based on the use of a single channel, E[T.sub.i(BW.sub.2MHz)] for i=1, 2, . . . N, where N is number of full-duplex links. The expected transmission time may be based on channel conditions as well as the amount of data for transmission on one or both full-duplex links. As generally the amount of data for downlink transmission may be substantially greater than the amount of data for uplink transmission, the AP may use only the downlink data in the calculation for a relatively good approximation. In some embodiments, the AP may use a prediction algorithm based on previous time periods (e.g., immediately preceding full-duplex uplink transmissions or transmissions over a similar time period). In some embodiments, the STA may transmit prior to the full-duplex communication session the amount of data (or estimate of the amount of data) to be transmitted during the full-duplex communication session. In some embodiments, the AP may return to operation 508 to adjust the optimal radio configuration of the STA based on the expected transmission time for the STA (e.g., if the expected transmission time exceeds a predetermined maximum) and may take into account the expected transmission time for one or more other STAs. In one example, if the expected transmission time for a STA using a particular MCS exceeds a maximum transmission time such that even using a maximum amount of bandwidth to transmit data for the STA the expected transmission time would exceed that of other STAs by a significant amount (e.g., 5-10%), the MCS may be adjusted to reduce the expected transmission time for the STA.”)
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to have modified Guo et al. to incorporate the teachings of Min et al. to transmit to the non-AP MLD an indication of a first guideline for use of a first link, to exchange of data with the non-AP MLD and to determine success or failure, in order to establish a mechanism that ensures fairness and optimize multi-link resource utilization thus improving network performance and responsiveness in a multi-link operating environment.
Regarding claim 2, Guo et al. disclose the method of claim 1, further comprising, in response to determining that the exchange of data is not consistent with the first guideline for use of the first link, limiting use of the first link by the non-AP MLD (EP 4422323A1 Paragraph 0294 discloses “The non-AP multi-link device may disable a link due to a reason such as…”, whereby the reasons include the violation of a negotiated capability).
Regarding claim 3, Guo et al. disclose the method of claim 2, wherein said limiting use of the first link by the non-AP MLD comprises disassociating with the non-AP MLD (EP 4422323A1 Paragraph 0088 discloses “…the AP multi-link device and the non-AP multi-link device can separately enable or disable a link.” Disabling all the links of a non-AP MLD disassociates the non-AP MLD).
Regarding claim 4, Guo et al. disclose the method of claim 2, wherein said limiting use of the first link by the non-AP MLD comprises prohibiting the non-AP MLD from further use of the first link for at least a first TID of the plurality of TIDs (EP 4422323A1 Paragraph 0077 discloses “the non-AP multi-link device determines, based on the third information and fourth information, that a first link is allowed to be used to transmit data corresponding to a first TID.” The forementioned paragraph teaches the inverse operation of the claim).
Regarding claim 5, Guo et al. disclose the method of claim 1.
Guo et al. fail to explicitly disclose the first guideline for use of the first link comprises a maximum transmission time per time interval.
However, in an analogous art Min et al. teaches the first guideline for use of the first link comprises a maximum transmission time per time interval (US 20170055284 A1 Paragraph 0039 discloses “In some embodiments, the AP may return to operation 508 to adjust the optimal radio configuration of the STA based on the expected transmission time for the STA (e.g., if the expected transmission time exceeds a predetermined maximum) and may take into account the expected transmission time for one or more other STAs. In one example, if the expected transmission time for a STA using a particular MCS exceeds a maximum transmission time such that even using a maximum amount of bandwidth to transmit data for the STA the expected transmission time would exceed that of other STAs by a significant amount (e.g., 5-10%), the MCS may be adjusted to reduce the expected transmission time for the STA.”).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to have modified Guo et al. to incorporate the teachings of Min et al. to implement the first guideline for use of the first link comprising a maximum transmission time per time interval, in order to establish a mechanism that ensures fairness and optimize multi-link resource utilization thus improving network performance and responsiveness in a multi-link operating environment.
Regarding claim 7, Guo et al disclose the method of claim 1, wherein the first guideline for use of the first link is applied to traffic associated with a first TID of the plurality of TIDs but not to traffic associated with a second TID of the plurality of TIDs (EP 4422323A1 Paragraph 0082 discloses “…based on the third information and fourth information, that a first link is allowed to be used to transmit data corresponding to a first TID…”).
Regarding claim 8, Guo et al. disclose the method of claim 7, wherein, according to the first mapping: the first TID of the plurality of TIDs is mapped to a subset of the plurality of links that does not include the first link; and the second TID of the plurality of TIDs is mapped to either: a subset of the plurality of links that includes the first link; or all links of the plurality of links (EP 4422323A1 Paragraph 0197-0201 discloses the TID to link mapping process that enables the mapping of the first/second TIDs in accordance to the limitation where by first TID is mapped to subset of links excluding the first link and the second TID is mapped to all links).
Regarding claim 11, Guo et al discloses the method of claim 1.
Guo et al. fail to explicitly disclose the first guideline for use of the first link is applied to traffic of all TIDs of the plurality of TIDs.
However, in an analogous art Min et al. teaches the first guideline for use of the first link is applied to traffic of all TIDs of the plurality of TIDs ( Paragraph 0038 discloses “At operation 508, the AP may calculate the optimal radio configurations for each of the uplink and downlink transmissions for each STA in which full-duplex communications are to occur. The radio configurations may include, for example, transmit power and modulation and coding scheme (MCS) for transmissions by each of the STA and AP. In some embodiments, the radio configuration may be stored in some or all of the STAs. In some embodiments, the radio configuration may be provided to at least one of the STAs by the AP immediately prior to the initiation of each full-duplex communication session with that STA or may be provided to the STA some time prior to the full-duplex communication session (e.g., when the STA attaches to the AP) and may further be periodically updated.”. Paragraph 0039 discloses “In some embodiments, the AP may return to operation 508 to adjust the optimal radio configuration of the STA based on the expected transmission time for the STA (e.g., if the expected transmission time exceeds a predetermined maximum) and may take into account the expected transmission time for one or more other STAs. In one example, if the expected transmission time for a STA using a particular MCS exceeds a maximum transmission time such that even using a maximum amount of bandwidth to transmit data for the STA the expected transmission time would exceed that of other STAs by a significant amount (e.g., 5-10%), the MCS may be adjusted to reduce the expected transmission time for the STA.”).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to have modified Guo et al. to incorporate the teachings of Min et al. to implement functionality that applies the guideline applied to the first link to all TIDs, in order to establish a mechanism that ensures fairness and optimize multi-link resource utilization thus improving network performance by ensuring that the guideline is applied to all TIDs.
Regarding claim 18, Guo et al. disclose an access point (AP) multi-link device (MLD) (AP MLD), comprising: a radio; and a processor communicatively coupled to the radio and configured to cause the AP MLD to: establish communication with a non-AP MLD; transmit, to the non-AP MLD, an indication of a mapping between a plurality of links and a plurality of traffic flows (EP 4422323A1 Paragraph 0296,0308 and FIG. 14 disclose the establishment of the connection between AP MLD and the non AP MLD. Additionally disclosed is the mapping of TIDs to links. “…the AP multi-link device may indicate a TID that is mapped to each link in a link 1 to a link 3 and that is determined by the AP multi-link device.” “…the AP multi-link device may connect the link 1 and the corresponding TID 1.”); and transmit, to the non-AP MLD, an indication of a flexible usage policy for at least one link of the plurality of links (EP 4422323A1 Paragraph 0078 discloses “The AP multi-link device may more flexibly control the TID-to-link mapping scheme based on a requirement of the AP multi-link device, to flexibly control data transmission.”).
Regarding claims 19 and 20, Guo et al disclose the AP MLD of claim 18 using a flexible usage policy (EP 4422323A1 Paragraph 0078 discloses “The AP multi-link device may more flexibly control the TID-to-link mapping scheme based on a requirement of the AP multi-link device, to flexibly control data transmission.”).
Guo et al. fail to explicitly disclose a maximum transmission time for a total of any transmissions of any traffic flows of the plurality of traffic flows.
However, in an analogous art Min et al. teaches a maximum transmission time for a total of any transmissions of any traffic flows of the plurality of traffic flows (Paragraph 0039 discloses “In some embodiments, the AP may return to operation 508 to adjust the optimal radio configuration of the STA based on the expected transmission time for the STA (e.g., if the expected transmission time exceeds a predetermined maximum) and may take into account the expected transmission time for one or more other STAs. In one example, if the expected transmission time for a STA using a particular MCS exceeds a maximum transmission time such that even using a maximum amount of bandwidth to transmit data for the STA the expected transmission time would exceed that of other STAs by a significant amount (e.g., 5-10%), the MCS may be adjusted to reduce the expected transmission time for the STA.”).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to have modified Guo et al. to incorporate the teachings of Min et al. to implement a maximum transmission time, in order to establish a mechanism that ensures fairness and optimize multi-link resource utilization thus improving network performance and responsiveness in a multi-link operating environment.
Regarding claim 21, Guo et al. disclose the method of claim 1, wherein the first guideline for use of the firs link is distinct from the and the first mapping (EP 4422323A1 Paragraph 0296,0308 and FIG. 14 disclose the establishment of the connection between AP MLD and the non AP MLD. Additionally disclosed is the mapping of TIDs to links. “…the AP multi-link device may indicate a TID that is mapped to each link in a link 1 to a link 3 and that is determined by the AP multi-link device.” “…the AP multi-link device may connect the link 1 and the corresponding TID 1.”
Guo et al. fail to explicitly disclose the first guideline for use of the first link.
However, in an analogous art Min et al. teaches the first guideline for use of the first link comprises a maximum transmission time per time interval (US 20170055284 A1 Paragraph 0039 discloses “In some embodiments, the AP may return to operation 508 to adjust the optimal radio configuration of the STA based on the expected transmission time for the STA (e.g., if the expected transmission time exceeds a predetermined maximum) and may take into account the expected transmission time for one or more other STAs. In one example, if the expected transmission time for a STA using a particular MCS exceeds a maximum transmission time such that even using a maximum amount of bandwidth to transmit data for the STA the expected transmission time would exceed that of other STAs by a significant amount (e.g., 5-10%), the MCS may be adjusted to reduce the expected transmission time for the STA.”). Therefore it is evident that first mapping (EP 4422323A1 Paragraph 0296,0308 and FIG. 14) is distinct from the first guideline (US 20170055284 Paragraph 0039).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to have modified Guo et al. to incorporate the teachings of Min et al. to implement the first guideline for use of the first link comprising a maximum transmission time per time interval, in order to establish a mechanism that ensures fairness and optimize multi-link resource utilization thus improving network performance and responsiveness in a multi-link operating environment.
Claims 6,10 and 13-17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Guo et al. (WO 2023066181 A1 translation used EP 4422323A1) in view of Min et al. (US 20170055284 A1) further in view of Hanqing et al.(WO 2022032150 A1).
Regarding claim 6, Guo et al. disclose the method of claim 5.
Guo et al. fail to explicitly disclose transmitting respective indications of respective maximum transmission times for respective beacon intervals.
However, in an analogous art Hanqing et al. teaches transmitting respective indications of respective maximum transmission times for respective beacon intervals (WO 2022032150 Paragraph 0127 and FIG.8 disclose beacon or other frames comprising the allowed transmission time field 856. Thus indicating the maximum transmission time in the beacon interval).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to have modified Guo et al. to incorporate the teachings of Hanqing et al. to implement the first guideline for use of the first link comprising a maximum transmission time for beacon intervals, in order to establish a mechanism that ensures fairness and optimize multi-link resource utilization thus improving network performance and responsiveness in a multi-link operating environment.
Regarding claim 10, Guo et al. disclose the method of claim 1.
Guo et al. fail to explicitly disclose determining at least one load balancing factor; and determining the first guideline for use of the first link based on the at least one load balancing factor.
However, in an analogous art Hanqing et al. teaches determining at least one load balancing factor; and determining the first guideline for use of the first link based on the at least one load balancing factor (WO 2022032150 A1 Paragraph 0134 discloses the transmission of an indicator on one or more links “…to inform the receiving STAs of potentially more pressing traffic on one or more links.” Additionally, “… the TIDs of the buffered traffic may be indicated and the receiving STA or MLD may be able to figure which link to monitor based on TID-to-kink mapping that the STA or MLD has established.” Thus balancing load over multiple links by prioritizing traffic).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to have modified Guo et al. to incorporate the teachings of Hanqing et al. to implement a load balancing factor by prioritizing traffic on one or mor link, in order to establish a mechanism that ensures fairness and optimize multi-link resource utilization thus improving network performance and responsiveness in a multi-link operating environment.
Regarding claim 13, Guo et al disclose the apparatus of claim 12.
Guo et al. fail to explicitly disclose buffering uplink traffic associated with a first traffic identifier; receive, from the AP MLD, a trigger for transmission on the first link; and transmit, to the AP MLD on the first link in response to receiving the trigger for transmission on the first link, the uplink traffic associated with the first traffic identifier.
However, in an analogous art Hanqing et al. teaches buffering uplink traffic associated with a first traffic identifier; receive, from the AP MLD, a trigger for transmission on the first link; and transmit, to the AP MLD on the first link in response to receiving the trigger for transmission on the first link, the uplink traffic associated with the first traffic identifier (WO 2022032150 A1 Paragraphs 0099-0100 disclose “…AP MLD 507 may buffer or queue a trigger frame (TF) on link 502 for MLD 505 and MDL 509 for the UL TIDs mapped to link 502”, buffering and transmitting uplink traffic).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to have modified Guo et al. to incorporate the teachings of Hanqing et al. to implement buffering and transmission of uplink traffic associated with a TID, in order to establish a mechanism that enables QoS, allowing the network to differentiate and prioritize different traffic types.
Regarding claim 14, Guo et al disclose the apparatus of claim 12, wherein to exchange data with the AP MLD using the first link according to the first rule, the processor is further configured to cause the non-AP MLD to: determine a first service period for the first link according to the first rule, wherein, according to the first rule: during the first service period, traffic associated with a first traffic identifier may be transmitted by the non-AP MLD on the first link (EP 4422323A1 Paragraph 0077 discloses “the non-AP multi-link device determines, based on the third information and fourth information, that a first link is allowed to be used to transmit data corresponding to a first TID.”); and during at least one time outside of the first service period, traffic associated with the first traffic identifier may not be transmitted by the non-AP MLD on the first link (EP k 4422323A1 Paragraph 0077 discloses “the non-AP multi-link device determines, based on the third information and fourth information, that a first link is allowed to be used to transmit data corresponding to a first TID.” Here the inverse of the limitation is disclosed); buffer, prior to the first service period, uplink traffic associated with the first traffic identifier; and transmit, during the first service period, the uplink traffic associated with the first traffic identifier to the AP MLD on the first link (WO 2022032150 A1 Paragraphs 0099-0100 disclose “…AP MLD 507 may buffer or queue a trigger frame (TF) on link 502 for MLD 505 and MDL 509 for the UL TIDs mapped to link 502”, buffering and transmitting uplink traffic).
Guo et al. fail to explicitly disclose buffering prior to the first service period, uplink traffic associated with the first traffic identifier; and transmit, during the first service period, the uplink traffic associated with the first traffic identifier to the AP MLD on the first link.
However, in an analogous art Hanqing et al. teaches buffering prior to the first service period, uplink traffic associated with the first traffic identifier; and transmit, during the first service period, the uplink traffic associated with the first traffic identifier to the AP MLD on the first link (WO 2022032150 A1 Paragraphs 0099-0100 disclose “…AP MLD 507 may buffer or queue a trigger frame (TF) on link 502 for MLD 505 and MDL 509 for the UL TIDs mapped to link 502”, buffering and transmitting uplink traffic).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to have modified Guo et al. to incorporate the teachings of Hanqing et al. to implement buffering and transmission of uplink traffic associated with a TID, in order to establish a mechanism that enables QoS, allowing the network to differentiate and prioritize different traffic types.
Regarding claim 15, Guo et al. disclose the apparatus of claim 12, wherein the processor is further configured to cause the non-AP MLD to: determine that, according to the first mapping, at least one traffic identifier of the plurality of traffic identifiers is not prioritized for the first link (EP 4422323A1 Paragraph 0077 discloses “the non-AP multi-link device determines, based on the third information and fourth information, that a first link is allowed to be used to transmit data corresponding to a first TID.” The forementioned paragraph teaches the inverse operation of the claim);
Guo et al. fail to explicitly disclose determining a requested usage of the first link for the at least one traffic identifier of the plurality of traffic identifiers; and transmit an indication of the requested usage to the AP MLD.
However, in an analogous art Hanqing et al. teaches determining a requested usage of the first link for the at least one traffic identifier of the plurality of traffic identifiers; and transmit an indication of the requested usage to the AP MLD (WO 2022032150 A1 Paragraph 0134 discloses “A non-AP STA or non-AP MLD may transmit a frame including a ML steering and control element to indicate traffic load on one or more links to one or more STAs or MLDs.”).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to have modified Guo et al. to incorporate the teachings of Hanqing et al. to implement determining a requested usage of the first link and transmit an indication of the requested usage to the AP MLD, in order to establish a mechanism that facilitates collaboration between the AP and non-AP when optimizing the use of the available links and prioritizing traffic types.
Regarding claim 16, Guo et al. disclose the apparatus of claim 15, wherein the requested usage comprises at least one of: a service frequency; or a traffic load (EP 4422323A1 Paragraph 0175 and FIG. 4 disclose that the SCS descriptor includes a traffic specification element and a traffic classification designed to describe and manage traffic load).
Regarding claim 17, Guo et al. disclose the apparatus of claim 15, wherein the indication of the requested usage comprises a stream classification service (SCS) request (EP 4422323A1 Paragraph 0004 discloses the SCS request).
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim 1 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.
In the remarks, applicant notes that the cited version of Guo is not dated prior to the priority date. The Examiner respectfully disagrees as Guo et al. WO 2023066181 A1 identifies with a foreign application priority date of October 21st 2021 corresponding to Chinese application number CN 1122956. Hence Guo et al. satisfies as prior art overcoming the applications provisional filing date of February 16th 2022.
Conclusion
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Sujoy Kundu can be reached on 571-272-8586.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR.
Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free).
/Samuel Dilan Rutnam/
Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2471
/MOHAMMAD S ADHAMI/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2471
Prosecution Insights