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 .
This action is in response to the application filed on 05 June 2023.
Claims 1-20 are under examination.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 21 February 2024. The submission is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 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 –
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1, 2, 4, 8, 9, 13-15, and 17-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Cheng et al. (US Publication 2021/0367886).
With respect to claims 1 and 19, Chen teaches An apparatus, (device, Figure 4) comprising:
a transceiver configured to communicate wirelessly; (processor, Figure 4) and
a processor coupled to the transceiver and configured to perform, via the transceiver, (processor coupled with transciever, Figure 4) an enhanced long range (ELR) wireless communication by:
transmitting an ELR physical-layer protocol data unit (PPDU); or receiving the ELR PPDU, (the ER PPDU 1100 may be used for wireless communications over extended ranges such as, for example, in outdoor environments, Paragraph 103)
wherein the ELR PPDU comprises a waveform structure with backward and forward compatibilities with -different generations of Wi-Fi standards. (he receiving device may determine, based on the presence of RL-SIG 914, that the PPDU conforms with the IEEE 802.11ax amendment, or later generation, of the IEEE 802.11 standard. The receiving device may further determine, based on a length field (L_LEN) of L-SIG 913, that the PPDU also conforms with the IEEE 802.11be amendment to the IEEE 802.11 standard (where L_LEN %3==0), Paragraph 94. ER PPDU 1100 includes an L-STF 1101, an L-LTF 1102, an L-SIG 1103, an RL-SIG 1104, a U-SIG 1105, an EHT-STF 1107, an EHT-LTF 1108, and a data field 1109 which may correspond to L-STF 608, L-LTF 610, L-SIG 612, RL-SIG 614, U-SIG 616, EHT-STF 622, EHT-LTF 624, and the data field 626, respectively, of the PPDU 600, Paragraph 103)
With respect to claim 2, Chen teaches wherein the ELR PPDU comprises an ELR short training field (ELR-STF), an ELR long training field (ELR-LTF), an ELR signal field (ELR-SIG) and an ELR data field (ELR-Data) after a first universal signal field (U-SIG1) and a second universal signal field (U-SIG2). (the ER PPDU 1100 may be used for wireless communications over extended ranges such as, for example, in outdoor environments. The ER PPDU 1100 includes an L-STF 1101, an L-LTF 1102, an L-SIG 1103, an RL-SIG 1104, a U-SIG 1105, an EHT-STF 1107, an EHT-LTF 1108, and a data field 1109 which may correspond to L-STF 608, L-LTF 610, L-SIG 612, RL-SIG 614, U-SIG 616, EHT-STF 622, EHT-LTF 624, and the data field 626, respectively, of the PPDU 600. In some implementations, the ER PPDU 1100 also may include an EHT-SIG 1106 which may correspond to EHT-SIG 618 of the PPDU 600, paragraph 103. U-SIG-2 may be a duplicate or repetition of U-SIG-1 and U-SIG-4 may be a duplicate or repetition of U-SIG-3. In other words, U-SIG-1 and U-SIG-2 may carry the same coded bits (coded bits A) and U-SIG-3 and U-SIG-4 may carry the same coded bits (coded bits B), paragraph 104)
With respect to claim 4, Chen teaches wherein the U-SIG1 and U-SIG2 support forward compatibility with respect to ELR applications and different Wi-Fi standards, and wherein the ELR PPDU further comprises legacy fields that function as spoofing to support backward compatibility. (U-SIG 616 may include one or more version-independent fields 632 and one or more version-dependent fields 634. Information in the version-independent fields 632 may include, for example, a version identifier (starting from the IEEE 802.11be amendment and beyond) and channel occupancy and coexistence information (such as a PPDU bandwidth). The version-dependent fields 634 may include format information fields used for interpreting other fields of U-SIG 616 and EHT-SIG 618. In some implementations, the version-dependent fields 634 may include at least a PPDU type and compression mode field 636, paragraph 68)
With respect to claims 8 and 20, Chen teaches wherein the ELR PPDU comprises an ELR short training field (ELR-STF), an ELR long training field (ELR-LTF), an ELR signal field (ELR-SIG) and an ELR data field (ELR-Data) after a first universal signal field (U-SIG1), a second universal signal field (U-SIG2) and respective duplicate universal signal fields (U-SIG3 and U-SIG4). (the ER PPDU 1100 may be used for wireless communications over extended ranges such as, for example, in outdoor environments. The ER PPDU 1100 includes an L-STF 1101, an L-LTF 1102, an L-SIG 1103, an RL-SIG 1104, a U-SIG 1105, an EHT-STF 1107, an EHT-LTF 1108, and a data field 1109 which may correspond to L-STF 608, L-LTF 610, L-SIG 612, RL-SIG 614, U-SIG 616, EHT-STF 622, EHT-LTF 624, and the data field 626, respectively, of the PPDU 600. In some implementations, the ER PPDU 1100 also may include an EHT-SIG 1106 which may correspond to EHT-SIG 618 of the PPDU 600, paragraph 103. U-SIG-2 may be a duplicate or repetition of U-SIG-1 and U-SIG-4 may be a duplicate or repetition of U-SIG-3. In other words, U-SIG-1 and U-SIG-2 may carry the same coded bits (coded bits A) and U-SIG-3 and U-SIG-4 may carry the same coded bits (coded bits B), paragraph 104)
With respect to claim 9, Chen teaches wherein the U-SIG1, U-SIG2, U-SIG3 and U- SIG4 support forward compatibility with respect to ELR applications and different Wi- Fi standards, and wherein the ELR PPDU further comprises legacy fields that function as spoofing to support backward compatibility. (U-SIG 616 may include one or more version-independent fields 632 and one or more version-dependent fields 634. Information in the version-independent fields 632 may include, for example, a version identifier (starting from the IEEE 802.11be amendment and beyond) and channel occupancy and coexistence information (such as a PPDU bandwidth). The version-dependent fields 634 may include format information fields used for interpreting other fields of U-SIG 616 and EHT-SIG 618. In some implementations, the version-dependent fields 634 may include at least a PPDU type and compression mode field 636, paragraph 68)
With respect to claim 13, Chen teaches wherein the ELR PPDU comprises an indication of an ELR version which differs from a physical-layer (PHY) identifier indicated in a universal signal field (U-SIG) of the ELR PPDU. (U-SIG 616 may include one or more version-independent fields 632 and one or more version-dependent fields 634. Information in the version-independent fields 632 may include, for example, a version identifier (starting from the IEEE 802.11be amendment and beyond) and channel occupancy and coexistence information (such as a PPDU bandwidth). The version-dependent fields 634 may include format information fields used for interpreting other fields of U-SIG 616 and EHT-SIG 618. In some implementations, the version-dependent fields 634 may include at least a PPDU type and compression mode field 636, paragraph 68)
With respect to claim 14, Chen teaches wherein the ELR PPDU comprises an indication of an ELR PPDU type in an ELR signal field (ELR-SIG), and wherein the ELR PPDU type is a single-user (SU), multi-user (MU) or trigger-based (TB) type. (the MU PPDU format may be used for a transmission to a single user or a non-OFDMA MU-MIMO transmission. More specifically, the transmission to a single user (when the PPDU Type and Compression Mode field of U-SIG is set to 1), paragraph 73)
With respect to claim 15, Chen teaches wherein the ELR PPDU comprises an indication of an ELR modulation and coding scheme (MCS) which comprises a subset of or a compressed MCS table from a complete MCS table. (the user field 1212 may include a beamformed subfield (1 bit), a coding subfield (1 bit), and an MCS subfield (2 bits) which may indicate whether DCM is used (with BPSK). Accordingly, the user field 1212 may be 4 bits in length, paragraph 113)
With respect to claim 17, Chen teaches wherein the ELR PPDU comprises an indication of an ELR resource unit (RU) allocation which comprises a subset of or a compressed and modified version of a complete RU allocation table. (the ER PPDU format, a number of fields or subfields of U-SIG 1105 may be shortened or condensed (such as bandwidth, MCS, and number of LTFs and midamble periodicity) and a number of additional fields or subfields may be omitted from U-SIG 1105 (such as punctured channel information), paragraph 111)
With respect to claim 18, Chen teaches wherein the ELR PPDU comprises an indication of an ELR station (STA) identifier (ID) which comprises a subset of an association identifier (AID), and wherein the ELR STA ID is transmitted starting from a least significant bit (LSB) thereof. (the ER PPDU 1100 is intended only for a single receiving device, the STA ID subfield may be omitted from the user field. More specifically, the receiving device may determine the STA ID from the MAC header of the ER PPDU 1100, paragraph 110)
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.
The factual inquiries set forth in Graham v. John Deere Co., 383 U.S. 1, 148 USPQ 459 (1966), that are applied for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103(a) 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
Claim 3 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103(a) as being unpatentable over Cheng et al. (US Publication 2021/0367886) in view of Balakrishnan et al. (US Publication 2024/0015059).
With respect to claim 3, Chen doesn’t teach wherein the ELR-STF is modulated using a Golay sequence.
Balakrishnan teaches wherein the ELR-STF is modulated using a Golay sequence. (The ER-STF 222 may be transmitted with one of the 802.11b DSSS, a zero correlation zone (ZCZ) spreading sequence, or a Golay sequence (defined in 802.11ad/ay)), paragraph 32)
Thus it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to implement system of Chen with the ELR-STF is modulated using a Golay sequence as taught by Balakrishnan. The motivation for combining Chen and Balakrishnan is to be able to improve on a reception range compared to a conventional PPDU.
Claims 5-7, 10-12 and 16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103(a) as being unpatentable over Cheng et al. (US Publication 2021/0367886) in view of Yu et al. (US Publication 2025/0071006).
With respect to claims 5 and 10, Chen doesn’t teach the ELR-SIG has a symbol duration of 3.2 microseconds (ps) with a guard interval (GI) of 1.6 or 3.2 ps.
Yu teaches the ELR-SIG has a symbol duration of 3.2 microseconds (ps) with a guard interval (GI) of 1.6 or 3.2 ps. (the first LTF may also be understood as being obtained based on the Barker code and the OFDM symbol occupied by the second LTF. For example, in addition to a guard interval, an OFDM symbol occupied by the HE-LTF and an OFDM symbol occupied by the EHT-LTF each may have three lengths: 1×, 2×, and 4×, which respectively correspond to 3.2 microseconds, 6.4 microseconds, and 12.8 microseconds. The guard interval may be 0.8 microseconds, 1.6 microseconds, or 3.2 microseconds. In other words, one OFDM symbol in the HE-LTF or the EHT-LTF may include the following combination: any one of {3.2 microseconds, 6.4 microseconds, 12.8 microseconds}, and any one of {0.8 microseconds, 1.6 microseconds, 3.2 microseconds}, paragraph 190)
Thus it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to implement system of Chen with the ELR-SIG has a symbol duration of 3.2 microseconds (ps) with a guard interval (GI) of 1.6 or 3.2 ps as taught by Yu. The motivation for combining Chen and Yu is to be able to increase a transmission distance of the PPDU, and increase a coverage area of a Wi-Fi signal.
With respect to claims 6 and 11, Chen doesn’t teach wherein the ELR-SIG has a symbol duration of 6.4 microseconds (ps) with a guard interval (GI) of 1.6 or 3.2 ps.
Yu teaches wherein the ELR-SIG has a symbol duration of 6.4 microseconds (ps) with a guard interval (GI) of 1.6 or 3.2 ps. (the first LTF may also be understood as being obtained based on the Barker code and the OFDM symbol occupied by the second LTF. For example, in addition to a guard interval, an OFDM symbol occupied by the HE-LTF and an OFDM symbol occupied by the EHT-LTF each may have three lengths: 1×, 2×, and 4×, which respectively correspond to 3.2 microseconds, 6.4 microseconds, and 12.8 microseconds. The guard interval may be 0.8 microseconds, 1.6 microseconds, or 3.2 microseconds. In other words, one OFDM symbol in the HE-LTF or the EHT-LTF may include the following combination: any one of {3.2 microseconds, 6.4 microseconds, 12.8 microseconds}, and any one of {0.8 microseconds, 1.6 microseconds, 3.2 microseconds}, paragraph 190)
Thus it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to implement system of Chen with the ELR-SIG has a symbol duration of 3.2 microseconds (ps) with a guard interval (GI) of 1.6 or 3.2 ps as taught by Yu. The motivation for combining Chen and Yu is to be able to increase a transmission distance of the PPDU, and increase a coverage area of a Wi-Fi signal.
With respect to claims 7 and 12, Chen doesn’t teach the ELR-SIG has a symbol duration of 12.8 microseconds (ps) with a guard interval (GI) of 1.6 or 3.2 ps.
Yu teaches the ELR-SIG has a symbol duration of 12.8 microseconds (ps) with a guard interval (GI) of 1.6 or 3.2 ps. (the first LTF may also be understood as being obtained based on the Barker code and the OFDM symbol occupied by the second LTF. For example, in addition to a guard interval, an OFDM symbol occupied by the HE-LTF and an OFDM symbol occupied by the EHT-LTF each may have three lengths: 1×, 2×, and 4×, which respectively correspond to 3.2 microseconds, 6.4 microseconds, and 12.8 microseconds. The guard interval may be 0.8 microseconds, 1.6 microseconds, or 3.2 microseconds. In other words, one OFDM symbol in the HE-LTF or the EHT-LTF may include the following combination: any one of {3.2 microseconds, 6.4 microseconds, 12.8 microseconds}, and any one of {0.8 microseconds, 1.6 microseconds, 3.2 microseconds}, paragraph 190)
Thus it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to implement system of Chen with the ELR-SIG has a symbol duration of 3.2 microseconds (ps) with a guard interval (GI) of 1.6 or 3.2 ps as taught by Yu. The motivation for combining Chen and Yu is to be able to increase a transmission distance of the PPDU, and increase a coverage area of a Wi-Fi signal.
With respect to claim 16, Chen doesn’t teach wherein the ELR PPDU comprises an one-bit indication of an ELR guard interval (GI) size indicating the ELR GI size as either 1.6 or 3.2 microseconds (ps).
Yu teaches wherein the ELR PPDU comprises an one-bit indication of an ELR guard interval (GI) size indicating the ELR GI size as either 1.6 or 3.2 microseconds (ps). (the first LTF may also be understood as being obtained based on the Barker code and the OFDM symbol occupied by the second LTF. For example, in addition to a guard interval, an OFDM symbol occupied by the HE-LTF and an OFDM symbol occupied by the EHT-LTF each may have three lengths: 1×, 2×, and 4×, which respectively correspond to 3.2 microseconds, 6.4 microseconds, and 12.8 microseconds. The guard interval may be 0.8 microseconds, 1.6 microseconds, or 3.2 microseconds. In other words, one OFDM symbol in the HE-LTF or the EHT-LTF may include the following combination: any one of {3.2 microseconds, 6.4 microseconds, 12.8 microseconds}, and any one of {0.8 microseconds, 1.6 microseconds, 3.2 microseconds}, paragraph 190)
Thus it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to implement system of Chen with the ELR-SIG has a symbol duration of 3.2 microseconds (ps) with a guard interval (GI) of 1.6 or 3.2 ps as taught by Yu. The motivation for combining Chen and Yu is to be able to increase a transmission distance of the PPDU, and increase a coverage area of a Wi-Fi signal.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Li et al. (US Publication 2025/0088321) discloses in the outdoor scenario, the maximum data rate of the RU106 is 3.8 Mb/s, and the corresponding uplink transmission distance is 52.5 m, which has a relatively low data rate; and the maximum data rate of the RU242 is 25.8 Mb/s, and the corresponding uplink transmission distance is 38.4 m, which has a relatively short transmission distance. In this case, it may be difficult to meet requirements for both a long distance and a high data rate in some transmission scenarios, for example, an outdoor video surveillance.
Ouchi et al. (US Publication 2021/0392682) discloses preamble includes an Extremely High Throughput (EHT) Signal Field (EHT-SIG-A). The EHT-SIG-A includes a subfield for setting a BSS color, and if the communication device and a first other communication device are to cooperatively transmit the radio frame to a second other communication device, a value of this subfield is set, without changing the BSS color used in a first BSS, based on the BSS color of a second BSS to which the second other communication device belongs.
Any inquiry concerning this communication from the examiner should be directed to ABDULLAHI AHMED whose telephone number is (571) 270-3652. The examiner can normally be reached on M-F 8:00AM-4:30PM.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Khalid Kassim can be reached on 571-270-3370. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
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). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/ABDULLAHI AHMED/Examiner, Art Unit 2475
Prosecution Insights