DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application is being examined under the pre-AIA first to invent provisions.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(e) the invention was described in (1) an application for patent, published under section 122(b), by another filed in the United States before the invention by the applicant for patent or (2) a patent granted on an application for patent by another filed in the United States before the invention by the applicant for patent, except that an international application filed under the treaty defined in section 351(a) shall have the effects for purposes of this subsection of an application filed in the United States only if the international application designated the United States and was published under Article 21(2) of such treaty in the English language.
Claim(s) 1 – 7, 11 - 17 is/are rejected under pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102(e) as being anticipated by Zhang et al. (US Patent 8,462,863).
Regarding claims 1 and 11, Zhang teaches a method and a station (STA) comprising: (i.e. fig. 1 shows a client (STA) comprising a processor, memory and transceiver for executing programmed instructions; see column 3, lines 61 – 67 and column 4, lines 1 - 10)
a transceiver configured to receive a first transmission, the first transmission including a signal (SIG) field, a data field, and at least one midamble within the data field, the SIG field including an indication of the presence of the at least one midamble within the data field;
(i.e. figure 10 shows a process of decoding a single data unit in a WLAN, first, a STA may receive the single data unit; see columns 15; lines 29 – 36) (See Also; Figure 3 shows the single data unit comprising a preamble (102), a data payload (105), and at least one midamble (108a) following a first portion of data (105a) from the payload; column 6, lines 53 - 65) (see Also: In an embodiment, the preamble of the single data unit may comprise a SIG field, wherein the SIG field may indicate that one or more midambles are included in the single data unit and may also indicate a position or location of the midamble(s) in the data portion; see column 9, lines 24 - 31) [NOTE: this embodiment is analogous to figure 7 of the instant application] and
a processor operatively coupled to the transceiver, the processor configured to decode the SIG field of the received first transmission to determine the at least one midamble in the data field based on the indicated presence,
(i.e. fig. 10 shows as part of decoding the single data unit, the STA may first receive the preamble (element 552), which may comprise a SIG field indicating that one or more midambles are included in the single data unit and may also indicate a position or location of the midamble(s) in the data portion (see column 9, lines 24 – 31) which is performed while decoding the preamble comprising the SIG field; see column 15, lines 29 - 36) and
update a channel estimate, (i.e. in both the instant application and the prior art, channel estimation is first performed in the preamble (see fig. 10; elements 552, 555) before the data portion is received, it is also inherent in traditional WLAN (IEEE 802.11) communication to perform channel estimation in the preamble before receiving data. This preamble-based approach is crucial for packet-based orthogonal frequency division multiplexing (OFDM) systems to identify and equalize channel distortions before data is received. Finally, the presence and indication of a midamble allows for more data to be transmitted in a single packet as each midamble may be used for re-calibration of channel estimates (see fig. 10; elements 550, 562) due to large data transmissions; see column 6, lines 35 - 51)
the processor further configured to decode the data field of the received transmission based on the decoded SIG field and the channel estimate.
(i.e. fig. 10 shows the STA receives a single data unit (552) and proceeds to decode the preamble, which includes the SIG field, it is inherent that the purpose of decoding the preamble in WLAN packets is to allow the receiving device to prepare for the incoming data by performing essential physical-layer functions, primarily synchronization, channel estimation, and packet detection. Next, the STA starts to receive a first portion of the data (element 558) (see also figure 3; 105a), then receives a midamble (element 560) (see figure 3; 108a), which it determines based upon the indication in the SIG field, during the midamble the STA realigns channel estimation (element 562) (see Also; column 6, lines 35 – 51) and then receives another portion of data (element 565) (see also figure 3; 105b), this process repeats until all the data is received. This allows the STA to decode large data transmissions (the data payload; figure 3; 105) in a single data unit (figure 3, 100) based on intermittent realignment of channel estimation which is performed during the midambles (figure 3, 108a-c…) indicated by the SIG field, after a predetermined amount of data is received (figure 3, 105a-c…))
Regarding claims 2 and 12, Zhang teaches the STA of claim 1 wherein the processor is further configured to decode the data field based on the updated channel estimate. (i.e. fig. 10 shows a method of the client decoding the data fields included in the data unit based on the preamble (SIG field) and the midamble(s) which may comprise updated channel estimate (elements 560, 562); see column 15; lines 29 - 60))
Regarding claims 3 and 13, Zhang teaches the STA of claim 1, wherein the processor and the transceiver are further configured to measure a channel quality associated with the received frame based on the at least one midamble. (i.e. the midamble may indicate the terminal to improve channel quality; see column 5, lines 5 - 31)
Regarding claims 4 and 14, Zhang teaches the STA of claim 1, wherein the processor and the transceiver are further configured to transmit a request to change a number of the at least one midamble in consecutive frames. (i.e. the numbers of midambles included in the data unit may be increased to improve channel quality; see column 5, lines 5 - 31)
Regarding claims 5 and 15, Zhang teaches the STA of claim 4, wherein the requested change is based on a channel quality. (i.e. the numbers of midambles included in the data unit may be increased to improve channel quality; see column 5, lines 5 - 31)
Regarding claims 6 and 16, Zhang teaches the STA of claim 1, wherein determining the midamble is based on an indication of a presence of the midamble in the SIG field. (i.e. the SIG field of the preamble comprises an indication of the one or more midambles included in the data unit; see column 9, lines 24 - 30)
Regarding claims 7 and 17, Zhang teaches the STA of claim 6, wherein the indication includes a location of the midamble. (i.e. the SIG field of the preamble comprises an indication of the position of the one or more midambles included in the data unit; see column 9, lines 24 - 35)
Regarding claims 8 and 18, Zhang teaches the STA of claim 6, wherein the indication includes a midamble periodicity. (i.e. the SIG field of the preamble comprises an indication of the amount of midambles included in the data unit; see column 9, lines 30 - 41) (see also 13 under 103 rejections)
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claims 8, 18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being obvious over Zhang et al. (US Patent 8,462,863) in view of Porat et al. (US Publication 2012/0269142) disclosed 61/501,239 .
Regarding claim 8 and 18, Zhang discloses all the recited limitations of claim 1 and 11 as described previously from which claims 8 and 18 depend. Zhang does not teach wherein the indication includes a midamble periodicity.
However, Porat teaches wherein the indication includes a midamble periodicity. (i.e. Porat discloses a number in the SIG field may indicate to place a mid-amble every certain number of symbols; “the SIG field bit is set to a value of one (1), the transmitter communication device may be implemented to place a mid-amble every certain number of symbols (e.g., every 30 or so symbols)” ; see paragraph 100)
It would have been obvious to a person with ordinary skill in the art before the time the invention was filed to use a symbol periodicity in establishing frame structure of Porat into Zhang. Both Zhang and Porat teach the using frames to communicate wireless data.
A person with ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make the modification to Zhang to improve network timing as a symbol is the smallest unit of information in the time direction.
Claims 9, 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being obvious over Zhang et al. (US Patent 8,462,863) in view of Chindapol et al. (US Publication 2009/0213766).
Regarding claim 9 and 19, Zhang discloses all the recited limitations of claim 1 and 11 as described previously from which claims 9 and 19 depend. Zhang does not teach wherein the indication provides a symbol offset of the at least one midamble.
However, Chindapol teaches wherein the indication provides a symbol offset of the at least one midamble. (i.e. Chindapol shows a preamble comprising a symbol offset number may be utilized to point to a location in a frame structure; see paragraph 60)
It would have been obvious to a person with ordinary skill in the art before the time the invention was filed to use a symbol offset in establishing frame structure to point to a particular location of Chindapol into Zhang. Both Zhang and Chindapol teach the using frames to communicate wireless data.
A person with ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make the modification to Zhang to improve network timing as a symbol is the smallest unit of information in the time direction.
Claims 10, 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being obvious over Zhang et al. (US Patent 8,462,863).
Regarding claim 10 and 20, Zhang discloses all the recited limitations of claim 1 and 11 as described previously from which claims 9 and 19 depend. Zhang does not teach wherein the indication indicates a fixed number of symbols between the at least one midamble. (i.e. as shown previously it is well known to POSITA to utilize symbol offsets to establish frame structure in wireless network, and utilizing a number of symbols between fields is just another generic embodiment of the same)
It would have been obvious to a person with ordinary skill in the art before the time the invention was filed to use a symbol offset in establishing frame structure to point to a particular location of the data frame of Zhang.
A person with ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make the modification to Zhang to improve network timing as a symbol is the smallest unit of information in the time direction.
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. 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.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ROBERT J LOPATA whose telephone number is (571)270-5158. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri 10-7 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, Sujoy Kundu can be reached at (571)272-8586. 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.
ROBERT J. LOPATA
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 2471
/ROBERT J LOPATA/
March 20, 2026Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2471