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 .
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 1-2, 4, 6-13, 15 and 17-22 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention. Regarding claims 1 and 12, the claims state: “wherein the width of the first BSS operating channel is a maximum width including a primary channel without any unavailable subchannel indicated by the disabled subchannel bitmap subfield when i) the second operation element includes the second channel information and ii) the disabled subchannel bitmap present subfield indicates that the disabled subchannel bitmap subfield is present” which is unclear. It is not clear what is meant by the “maximum width” as the first operating channel width is less than the second operating channel. Further the claim is for a non-legacy station, so the operating channel bandwidth used by a legacy station doesn’t appear to limit the structure of the claimed non-legacy station.
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 1-2, 4, 6-13, 15 and 17-22 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.
Regarding claims 1 and 12, the claims state: “wherein the width of the first BSS operating channel is a maximum width including a primary channel without any unavailable subchannel indicated by the disabled subchannel bitmap subfield when i) the second operation element includes the second channel information and ii) the disabled subchannel bitmap present subfield indicates that the disabled subchannel bitmap subfield is present” which does not appear to be supported by the specification. Applicant stated the support was in Para [0363] and [0476-485] but the Examiner did not find support for these specific conditions in those paragraphs. Applicant should point to the specific paragraphs if there is support for this limitation.
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.
Claims 1, 2, 4, 6, 7, 12, 13, 15, 17 and 18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Verma et al (US 2019/0327740, hereinafter Verma) and in view of Chu et al (US 2019/0349930, hereinafter Chu, as disclosed in the IDS), in view of Jeon et al (US 2021/0409078, hereinafter Jeon, claiming priority date of the provisional applications) and in view of Verma et al (US 2019/0116545, hereinafter Verma2).
Regarding claim 1, Verma discloses a non-legacy station (STA, Fig. 17, EHT device, Para [0006]) of a wireless communication system, the STA comprising: a transceiver and a processor (transceiver and processor, Fig. 17) configured to control the transceiver, wherein the processor is configured to: receive a management frame including a first operation element and a second operation element from an access point (AP) (AP transmits management frames to wireless stations, Para [0061] with first and second operation information, Fig. 3), wherein the first operation element includes first channel information indicating a basic service set (BSS) operating channel for a legacy STA, and wherein the second operation element is related to the non-legacy STA (BSS bandwidth and channel width for first class of STAs, such as legacy STAs and second channel width for second class of stations, Para [0063]), and transmit a PPDU to the AP, based on the first operation element or the second operation element (transmission of PPDUs to the AP, Para [0043]), wherein second operation element includes second channel information indicating a second BSS operating channel for the non-legacy STA, and a width of the first BSS operating channel for the legacy STA is less than a width of the second BSS operating channel for the non-legacy STA (different channel widths for the legacy STAs and non-legacy STAs, the channel width for HE devices (410) is less than the channel width for EHT devices (405), Para [0091]/Fig. 4); but does not disclose wherein each bit of the disabled subchannel bitmap subfield indicates whether a corresponding subchannel among one or more subchannels included in the second BSS operating channel is unavailable. Chu discloses subchannel bitmap indicating whether the sub-channels within the overall bandwidth are punctured, Para [0108] and Verma discloses puncturing status of channels within the channel width field of second operation information, Para [0087]. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to utilize the techniques taught by Chu in the system of Verma in order to increase adaptively of the AP to operate larger channels that have punctured sub-channel and negotiating bandwidth; and do not disclose wherein the second operation element includes a disabled subchannel bitmap present subfield indicating whether a disabled subchannel bitmap subfield is included in the second operation element. Jeon discloses the disallowed subchannel bitmap present field and the disallowed subchannel bitmap, Fig. 18 or page 13 of provisional application 63/045,403. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to utilize the techniques taught by Jeon in the system of Verma in view of Chu in order to improve the indication information in subfields of a frame and improve support of EHT standard in the next generation; and does not fully disclose wherein the width of the first BSS operating channel is a maximum width including a primary channel without any unavailable subchannel indicated by the disabled subchannel bitmap subfield wherein i) the second operation element includes the second channel information and ii) the disabled subchannel bitmap present field indicates that the disabled subchannel bitmap subfield is present. Verma discloses a 20 MHz channel can be punctured and unavailable and legacy STAs may not be capable communications with punctured bandwidth, Para [0091]/Fig. 4 and channel width for first class legacy station is continuous channels (415-a and 415-b), Fig. 4. Verma2 discloses legacy WLAN devices support a maximum bandwidth of 160 MHz while EHT devices can support 320 MHz, Para [0033]. In this case, no puncture subchannel is indicated and the legacy station could use its maximum bandwidth. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to utilize the techniques taught by Verma2 in the system of Verma in view of Chu and Jeon in order to allow stations to operate at higher bandwidths and improve performance of the BSS.
Regarding claims 2 and 13, Verma discloses the STA/method of claim 1/12, but not fully wherein the second channel information is included in the second operation element when both of: i) the width of the first BSS operating channel is different from the width of the second BSS operating channel and ii) the width of the second BSS operating channel for the non-legacy STA includes at least one unavailable channel and/or exceeds the maximum bandwidth supported by the legacy STA are satisfied. Verma discloses a 20 MHz channel can be punctured and unavailable and legacy STAs may not be capable communications with punctured bandwidth, Para [0091]/Fig. 4, channel width for first class legacy station is continuous channels (415-a and 415-b), Fig. 4) Chu discloses one operation IE includes the primary sub-channel and the other operation IE includes the overall bandwidth, Para [0112].
Regarding claims 4 and 15, Verma discloses the STA/method of claim 1/12, wherein the first operation element is an operation element for a high efficiency (HE) STA, and wherein the second operation element is an operation element for an extremely high throughput (EHT) STA (first class of stations such as HE and second class of stations such as EHT, Para [0063]).
Regarding claims 6 and 17, Verma discloses the STA/method of claim 5/16, wherein each bit of the disabled subchannel bitmap subfield indicates whether a corresponding unavailable channel is included in the BSS operating channel for the STA. Chu discloses subchannel bitmap indicating whether the sub-channels within the overall bandwidth are punctured, Para [0108] and each bit corresponds to a sub-channel.
Regarding claims 7 and 18, Verma discloses the STA/method of claim 5/16, wherein, when the at least one unavailable channel is not included in the BSS operating channel for the STA, a value of the disabled subchannel bitmap present subfield is configured as “0” that is a value indicating that the disabled subchannel bitmap subfield is not included. Chu discloses subchannel bitmap indicating whether the sub-channels within the overall bandwidth are punctured, Para [0108] and each bit corresponds to a sub-channel, obvious to one of ordinary skill the bit could be 0 to indicate punctured/disabled.
Regarding claim 12, Verma discloses a method of transmitting a frame by a station (STA) in a wireless communication system, the method comprising: receiving a management frame including a first operation element and a second operation element from an access point (AP) (AP transmits management frames to wireless stations, Para [0061] with first and second operation information, Fig. 3) , wherein the first operation element indicating a basic service set (BSS) operating channel for a legacy STA, and wherein the second operation element indicating a BSS operating channel for the STA that is not the legacy STA (BSS bandwidth and channel width for first class of STAs, such as legacy STAs and second channel width for second class of stations, Para [0063]); and transmitting a PPDU to the AP, based on the first operation element or the second operation element (transmission of PPDUs to the AP, Para [0043]), wherein second operation element includes second channel information indicating a second BSS operating channel for the non-legacy STA, and a width of the first BSS operating channel for the legacy STA is less than a width of the second BSS operating channel for the non-legacy STA (different channel widths for the legacy STAs and non-legacy STAs, the channel width for HE devices (410) is less than the channel width for EHT devices (405), Para [0091]/Fig. 4); but does not disclose wherein each bit of the disabled subchannel bitmap subfield indicates whether a corresponding subchannel among one or more subchannels included in the second BSS operating channel is unavailable. Chu discloses subchannel bitmap indicating whether the sub-channels within the overall bandwidth are punctured, Para [0108] and Verma discloses puncturing status of channels within the channel width field of second operation information, Para [0087]. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to utilize the techniques taught by Chu in the system of Verma in order to increase adaptively of the AP to operate larger channels that have punctured sub-channel and negotiating bandwidth; and do not disclose wherein the second operation element includes a disabled subchannel bitmap present subfield indicating whether a disabled subchannel bitmap subfield is included in the second operation element. Jeon discloses the disallowed subchannel bitmap present field and the disallowed subchannel bitmap, Fig. 18 or page 13 of provisional application 63/045,403. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to utilize the techniques taught by Jeon in the system of Verma in view of Chu in order to improve the indication information in subfields of a frame and improve support of EHT standard in the next generation; and does not fully disclose wherein the width of the first BSS operating channel is a maximum width including a primary channel without any unavailable subchannel indicated by the disabled subchannel bitmap subfield wherein i) the second operation element includes the second channel information and ii) the disabled subchannel bitmap present field indicates that the disabled subchannel bitmap subfield is present. Verma discloses a 20 MHz channel can be punctured and unavailable and legacy STAs may not be capable communications with punctured bandwidth, Para [0091]/Fig. 4 and channel width for first class legacy station is continuous channels (415-a and 415-b), Fig. 4. Verma2 discloses legacy WLAN devices support a maximum bandwidth of 160 MHz while EHT devices can support 320 MHz, Para [0033]. In this case, no puncture subchannel is indicated and the legacy station could use its maximum bandwidth. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to utilize the techniques taught by Verma2 in the system of Verma in view of Chu and Jeon in order to allow stations to operate at higher bandwidths and improve performance of the BSS.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 11/7/2025 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. The Applicant amends the limitations and argues the references do not disclose the amended limitations. Applicant argues over the 35 USC 102 rejection but argument is moot, as the claims are rejected under 35 USC 103 and in view of new references, in response to the amendments. Applicant argues Chu includes the primary subchannel of the operating channel regardless of whether it satisfies a specific condition, even if punctured. The Applicant argues the width of the operating channel for legacy STA is set to the maximum value including the primary channel but excluding any punctured subchannel if two conditions are met: i) the second channel operation element includes the second channel information and ii) the disabled subchannel bitmap present field indicates the disabled subchannel bitmap is present. In response, there is now a 112 rejection in response to the last amendment. The last limitation is unclear. The limitation states the width of the first operating channel is a maximum width including primary channel without any unavailable subchannel indicated by the disabled subchannel bitmap field. However, Applicant argues something slightly different: the operating channel is set to max value with primary channel and excluding any punctured subchannel. The limitation appears to be stating that no subchannel is indicated as punctured in the disabled subchannel bitmap field but Applicant argues punctured subchannels are excluded (this means the disabled subchannel bitmap field does indicate punctured channel but they are “excluded”), which is confusing. It doesn’t matter either way, because the claim uses the term comprising, which is an open-ended term. This means the first operating channel can be the max bandwidth even if the conditions were not true or one was false. It is also not known where the support for this limitation is in the specification. Verma2 discloses the max bandwidth of HE devices as 160 MHz, therefore that can be the operating bandwidth if no subchannel is punctured.
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 KEVIN CUNNINGHAM whose telephone number is (571) 272-1765. The examiner can normally be reached Monday through Thursday 7:30-18:00 (EST).
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Huy Vu can be reached on (571) 272-3155. The fax 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.
/KEVIN M CUNNINGHAM/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2461