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 Arguments
Applicant’s amendment filed 01/20/2026 with respect to the double patenting rejection for claim(s) 1, 11, 13, 23, 27, and 29 made on 10/22/2025 has been considered and the double patenting rejection to the claims is withdrawn because claims 1, 11, 13, 23, 27, and 29 are no longer obvious variations of the claim(s) in co-pending applications 18/036101, 18/274592, and 18/547165.
Applicant's arguments filed 01/20/2026 with respect to claim(s) 1, 13, 27, and 29 have been considered but are moot in view of the new ground(s) of rejection under 103 based on previously cited reference Verma et al. (US 2017/0325202 A1) in view of new reference Jang et al. (US 2023/0081649 A1). Response to Applicant’s arguments: Regarding Applicant’s argument (1) on pg. 10 about the new limitation “the resource unit is a single-type resource unit or a multi-resource unit depending on a type of a station in communication with the access point,” the Examiner notes that the new reference Jang discloses the limitation in Fig. 36, [0356]-[0358]: The AP may allocate multiple RUs to an STA having this capability, and does not allocate the multiple RUs to an STA not having this capability. An RU allocation method according to TB MRU TX capability [where] STAs 1 and 2 are capable of TB PPDU transmission in the form of an MRU, and an STA 3 is not capable of transmission. In this case, an AP may allocate an MRU to the STAs 1 and 2 in the form of a 484+242 RU through a trigger frame, and may allocate only one 484 RU to the STA 3. Regarding Applicant’s argument (2) on pg. 12 about the previously presented limitation of claim 7 “wherein the first message frame further comprises: a first identifier indicating that the multi-resource unit has been assigned,” the Examiner notes that the current claim language does not include a limitation where the UE can determine whether the MU has been assigned based on a presence or absence of a first identifier and that the first identifier cannot be used to determine whether SU has been assigned or not, as argued by Applicant. The current claim language merely requires a first identifier for indicating that the MRU has been assigned. Verma discloses in Fig. 3B, [0059]: techniques for recipient STA to determine whether its resource unit allocation unit is an UL SU or UL MU [where] the seven (7) bit indices of the resource unit allocation subfield (see FIG. 3B, RU Allocation 320) may utilize the identified bit values to convey the identified message to the STA based on the determination whether at least one or more allocated resource units are SU or MU. The Examiner also notes that based on Fig. 4, if the 7 bits include a number in range 01000101 – 01010110, then that is indication for an MRU being allocated, and if no number in that range is included, then no MRU is being allocated. A number in that range may be also mapped to the claimed “first identifier.” Regarding Applicant’s argument (3) on pg. 13-16 about the previously presented limitation of claim 8 “wherein the first message frame further comprises: a second identifier indicating a bandwidth corresponding to the multi-resource unit and a third identifier indicating a frequency band corresponding to the multi-resource unit,” the Examiner notes that this limitation may be given no patentable weight because the limitation is connected to the previously presented limitation of claim 7 “wherein the first message frame further comprises: a first identifier indicating that the multi-resource unit has been assigned” with an “or.” Only one of the two limitations is required and the Examiner chooses to examine the previously presented limitation of claim 7.
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.
Claim(s) 1-2, 4-5, 9, 11, 13-14, 16-17, 21, 23, 27, and 29 is/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 pre-AIA the applicant regards as the invention.
Claims 1, 13, 27, and 29 recite the limitations "wherein the first message frame further comprises: a first identifier indicating that the multi-resource unit has been assigned; or wherein the first message frame further comprises: a second identifier indicating a bandwidth corresponding to the multi-resource unit and a third identifier indicating a frequency band corresponding to the multi-resource unit.” However, the claims also recite “determining a first message frame, wherein the first message frame comprises information for indicating a resource unit, the resource unit is a single-type resource unit or a multi-resource unit depending on a type of a station in communication with the access point.” It is not clear if the first identifier or the second and third identifiers must be included in the first message frame when the first message frame indicates a single-type resource unit. In view of Applicant’s specification, it appears the identifiers are included when the first message frame indicates a MRU. Therefore, the Examiner suggests to amend the limitations to include a condition that the MRU is indicated in the first message frame, i.e., wherein the first message frame comprises information for indicating the multi-resource unit, first message further comprises.”
Claims 2, 4-5, 9, 11, 14, 16-17, 21, and 23 are rejected based on their dependency to claims 1, 13, or 27.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(d):
(d) REFERENCE IN DEPENDENT FORMS.—Subject to subsection (e), a claim in dependent form shall contain a reference to a claim previously set forth and then specify a further limitation of the subject matter claimed. A claim in dependent form shall be construed to incorporate by reference all the limitations of the claim to which it refers.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, fourth paragraph:
Subject to the following paragraph [i.e., the fifth paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112], a claim in dependent form shall contain a reference to a claim previously set forth and then specify a further limitation of the subject matter claimed. A claim in dependent form shall be construed to incorporate by reference all the limitations of the claim to which it refers.
Claim(s) 2 and 14 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(d) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, 4th paragraph, as being of improper dependent form for failing to further limit the subject matter of the claim upon which it depends, or for failing to include all the limitations of the claim upon which it depends. Claims 2 and 14 recite “wherein the multi-resource unit consists of single-type resource units” and depend on claims 1 and 13 which already recite “the multi-resource unit at least comprises a first single-type resource unit and a second single-type resource unit.” Therefore, claims 2 and 14 fail to further limit the subject matter of the claim upon which they depend.
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 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) 1-2, 4-5, 9, 11, 13-14, 16-17, 21, 23, 27, and 29 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Verma et al. (US 2017/0325202 A1) in view of Jang et al. (US 2023/0081649 A1).
Regarding claim 1, Verma discloses A communication method, performed by an access point, the method comprising (Fig. 6A: AP):
determining a first message frame, wherein the first message frame comprises information for indicating a resource unit, the resource unit is a single-type resource unit or a multi-resource unit (Fig. 6A, [0068]: AP generates a trigger frame identifying whether one or more resources allocated are a single user resource unit allocation or a multi-user resource unit allocation. The trigger frame includes resource allocation information for STAs to utilize for uplink transmission),
sending the first message frame (Fig. 6A, [0071]: AP transmits the trigger frame),
wherein the first message frame further comprises: a first identifier indicating that the multi-resource unit has been assigned (Fig. 3B, [0059]: the trigger frame includes an RU allocation subfield 320 set to an index indicating MU RU allocation so that the recipient STA can determine whether its resource unit allocation unit is an UL SU or UL MU where seven (7) bit indices of the resource unit allocation subfield (see FIG. 3B, RU Allocation 320) may utilize the identified bit values to convey the identified message to the STA based on the determination whether at least one or more allocated resource units are SU or MU. Fig. 4: if the 7 bits include a number in range 01000101 – 01010110, then that is indication for an MRU being allocated, and if no number in that range is included, then no MRU is being allocated); or
wherein the first message frame further comprises: a second identifier indicating a bandwidth corresponding to the multi-resource unit and a third identifier indicating a frequency band corresponding to the multi-resource unit (no patentable weight given because previous limitation is considered).
Verma does not disclose, but Jang discloses the resource unit is a single-type resource unit or a multi-resource unit depending on a type of a station in communication with the access point (Fig. 36, [0356]-[0358]: The AP may allocate multiple RUs to an STA having this capability, and does not allocate the multiple RUs to an STA not having this capability. An RU allocation method according to TB MRU TX capability [where] STAs 1 and 2 are capable of TB PPDU transmission in the form of an MRU, and an STA 3 is not capable of transmission. In this case, an AP may allocate an MRU to the STAs 1 and 2 in the form of a 484+242 RU through a trigger frame, and may allocate only one 484 RU to the STA 3); and
the multi-resource unit at least comprises a first single-type resource unit and a second single-type resource unit, and the first single-type resource unit has a different number of subcarriers than the second single-type resource unit (Fig. 36, [0356]: an AP may allocate an MRU to the STAs 1 and 2 in the form of a 484+242 RU through a trigger frame. [0309]: an STA may transmit a TB PPDU by using 242+484, i.e., a 242RU tone plan and a 484RU tone plan defined in the current 11be. [0104]: An RU may include a plurality of subcarriers (or tones)).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to program the AP, as taught by Verma, to allocate MRU (i.e., 484+242 RU) to an STA having MRU capability and to allocate a single RU (i.e., 484 RU) to an STA not having the MRU capability, where the 242RU has a tone (subcarrier) plan and the 484RU has a tone (subcarrier) plan, as taught by Jang.
Doing so allows the AP to allocate the RU(s) to an STA based on the capability of an STA for MRU (Jang: Fig. 36, [0356]-[0358]).
Regarding claim 27, Verma discloses An access point, comprising (Fig. 7: AP):
a processor and (Fig. 7: processor(s) 712)
a memory storing a computer program executable by the processor (Fig. 7: memory 716 storing application(s) 775 executable by processor(s) 712),
wherein the processor is configured to:
determine a first message frame, wherein the first message frame comprises information for indicating a resource unit, the resource unit is a single-type resource unit or a multi-resource unit(Fig. 6A, [0068]: AP generates a trigger frame identifying whether one or more resources allocated are a single user resource unit allocation or a multi-user resource unit allocation. The trigger frame includes resource allocation information for STAs to utilize for uplink transmission),
send the first message frame (Fig. 6A, [0071]: AP transmits the trigger frame),
wherein the first message frame further comprises: a first identifier indicating that the multi-resource unit has been assigned (Fig. 3B, [0059]: the trigger frame includes an RU allocation subfield 320 set to an index indicating MU RU allocation so that the recipient STA can determine whether its resource unit allocation unit is an UL SU or UL MU where seven (7) bit indices of the resource unit allocation subfield (see FIG. 3B, RU Allocation 320) may utilize the identified bit values to convey the identified message to the STA based on the determination whether at least one or more allocated resource units are SU or MU. Fig. 4: if the 7 bits include a number in range 01000101 – 01010110, then that is indication for an MRU being allocated, and if no number in that range is included, then no MRU is being allocated); or
wherein the first message frame further comprises: a second identifier indicating a bandwidth corresponding to the multi-resource unit and a third identifier indicating a frequency band corresponding to the multi-resource unit (no patentable weight given because previous limitation is considered).
Verma does not disclose, but Jang discloses the resource unit is a single-type resource unit or a multi-resource unit depending on a type of a station in communication with the access point (Fig. 36, [0356]-[0358]: The AP may allocate multiple RUs to an STA having this capability, and does not allocate the multiple RUs to an STA not having this capability. An RU allocation method according to TB MRU TX capability [where] STAs 1 and 2 are capable of TB PPDU transmission in the form of an MRU, and an STA 3 is not capable of transmission. In this case, an AP may allocate an MRU to the STAs 1 and 2 in the form of a 484+242 RU through a trigger frame, and may allocate only one 484 RU to the STA 3); and
the multi-resource unit at least comprises a first single-type resource unit and a second single-type resource unit, and the first single-type resource unit has a different number of subcarriers than the second single-type resource unit (Fig. 36, [0356]: an AP may allocate an MRU to the STAs 1 and 2 in the form of a 484+242 RU through a trigger frame. [0309]: an STA may transmit a TB PPDU by using 242+484, i.e., a 242RU tone plan and a 484RU tone plan defined in the current 11be. [0104]: An RU may include a plurality of subcarriers (or tones)).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to program the AP, as taught by Verma, to allocate MRU (i.e., 484+242 RU) to an STA having MRU capability and to allocate a single RU (i.e., 484 RU) to an STA not having the MRU capability, where the 242RU has a tone (subcarrier) plan and the 484RU has a tone (subcarrier) plan, as taught by Jang.
Doing so allows the AP to allocate the RU(s) to an STA based on the capability of an STA for MRU (Jang: Fig. 36, [0356]-[0358]).
Regarding claim 13, Verma discloses A communication method, performed by a station, the method comprising (Fig. 9: STA):
receiving a first message frame, wherein the first message frame comprises information for indicating a resource unit, and the resource unit is a single-type resource unit or a multi-resource unit (Fig. 9, [0100]-[0101]: STA receives a trigger frame identifying whether one or more resources allocated are a single user resource unit allocation or a multi-user resource unit allocation); and
performing uplink transmission using the resource unit (Fig. 9, [0105]: STA communicates with the AP on the one or more resources allocated to the STA),
wherein the first message frame further comprises: a first identifier indicating that the multi-resource unit has been assigned (Fig. 3B, [0059]: the trigger frame includes an RU allocation subfield 320 set to an index indicating MU RU allocation so that the recipient STA can determine whether its resource unit allocation unit is an UL SU or UL MU where seven (7) bit indices of the resource unit allocation subfield (see FIG. 3B, RU Allocation 320) may utilize the identified bit values to convey the identified message to the STA based on the determination whether at least one or more allocated resource units are SU or MU. Fig. 4: if the 7 bits include a number in range 01000101 – 01010110, then that is indication for an MRU being allocated, and if no number in that range is included, then no MRU is being allocated); or
wherein the first message frame further comprises: a second identifier indicating a bandwidth corresponding to the multi-resource unit and a third identifier indicating a frequency band corresponding to the multi-resource unit (no patentable weight given because previous limitation is considered).
Verma does not disclose, but Jang discloses the resource unit is a single-type resource unit or a multi-resource unit depending on a type of the station (Fig. 36, [0356]-[0358]: The AP may allocate multiple RUs to an STA having this capability, and does not allocate the multiple RUs to an STA not having this capability. An RU allocation method according to TB MRU TX capability [where] STAs 1 and 2 are capable of TB PPDU transmission in the form of an MRU, and an STA 3 is not capable of transmission. In this case, an AP may allocate an MRU to the STAs 1 and 2 in the form of a 484+242 RU through a trigger frame, and may allocate only one 484 RU to the STA 3); and
wherein the multi-resource unit at least comprises: a first single-type resource unit and a second single-type resource unit, and the first single-type resource unit has a different number of subcarriers than the second single-type resource unit (Fig. 36, [0356]: an AP may allocate an MRU to the STAs 1 and 2 in the form of a 484+242 RU through a trigger frame. [0309]: an STA may transmit a TB PPDU by using 242+484, i.e., a 242RU tone plan and a 484RU tone plan defined in the current 11be. [0104]: An RU may include a plurality of subcarriers (or tones)).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to program the AP, as taught by Verma, to allocate MRU (i.e., 484+242 RU) to an STA having MRU capability and to allocate a single RU (i.e., 484 RU) to an STA not having the MRU capability, where the 242RU has a tone (subcarrier) plan and the 484RU has a tone (subcarrier) plan, as taught by Jang.
Doing so allows the AP to allocate the RU(s) to an STA based on the capability of an STA for MRU (Jang: Fig. 36, [0356]-[0358]).
Regarding claim 29, Verma in view of Jang discloses A station, comprising (Verma - Fig. 12: STA):
a processor and (Verma - Fig. 12: processor(s) 1212)
a memory storing a computer program executable by the processor (Verma - Fig. 12: memory 1216 storing application(s) 1275 executable by processor(s) 1212),
wherein the processor is configured to perform the method of claim 13 (Verma in view of Jang- see mapping of claim 13).
Regarding claims 2 and 14, Verma in view of Jang discloses all features of claim(s) 1 and 13 as outlined above.
Verma does not disclose, but Jang discloses wherein the multi-resource unit consists of single-type resource units (Fig. 36, [0356]: an AP may allocate an MRU to the STAs 1 and 2 in the form of a 484+242 RU through a trigger frame.).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to program the multi-user resource unit allocation, as taught by Verma, to be in the form of a 484+242 RU, as taught by Jang.
Doing so allows the AP to allocate the RU(s) to an STA based on the capability of an STA for MRU (Jang: Fig. 36, [0356]-[0358]).
Regarding claims 4 and 16, Verma in view of Jang discloses all features of claim(s) 1 and 13 as outlined above.
Verma discloses wherein the first message frame comprises: a resource unit allocation subfield (Fig. 3B: the trigger frame includes an RU allocation subfield 320),
and the communication method further comprises: setting the resource unit allocation subfield to a first value for indicating an index of the resource unit (claim 4) / determining the resource unit for uplink transmission based on a value of the resource unit allocation subfield (claim 16): (Fig. 4, [0059]: the RU allocation subfield 320 is set to an index indicating SU RU allocation or MU RU allocation so that the STA can determine whether at least one or more allocated resource units are SU or MU).
Regarding claims 5 and 17, Verma in view of Jang discloses all features of claim(s) 4 and 16 as outlined above.
Verma discloses wherein the resource unit is (claim 5) / performing uplink transmission using (claim 17) the single-type resource unit, in response to the first value being a value within a first range of values (Fig. 4: the index may correspond to an index within a range of SU RU allocation. [0068]: The trigger frame includes resource allocation information for STAs to utilize for uplink transmission. [0105]: STA communicates with the AP on the one or more resources allocated to the STA), or
the resource unit is (claim 5) / performing uplink transmission using (claim 17) the multi-resource unit, in response to the first value being a value different from values within the first range of values (Fig. 4: the index may correspond to an index within a range of MU RU allocation. [0068]: The trigger frame includes resource allocation information for STAs to utilize for uplink transmission. [0105]: STA communicates with the AP on the one or more resources allocated to the STA).
Regarding claim 9, Verma in view of Jang discloses all features of claim(s) 1 as outlined above.
Verma discloses further comprising at least one of:
setting the second identifier to a second value corresponding to a bandwidth of 160 MHz, and setting the third identifier to a third value corresponding to a lower frequency band indicating lower 160 MHz bandwidth (Fig. 6A, [0068]: AP generates the trigger frame. Fig. 3A, [0057]: the bandwidth may be 160 MHz and the spatial reuse bits may be SRP values for first, second, third, and fourth 40 MHz channel arranged in increasing order of absolute frequency); or
setting the second identifier to the second value corresponding to the bandwidth of 160 MHz, and setting the third identifier to a fourth value corresponding to a higher frequency band indicating higher 160 MHz bandwidth (Fig. 3A, [0057]: the bandwidth may be 160 MHz and the spatial reuse bits may be SRP values for first, second, third, and fourth 40 MHz channel arranged in increasing order of absolute frequency).
Regarding claim 21, Verma in view of Jang discloses all features of claim(s) 13 as outlined above.
Verma discloses further comprising at least one of:
performing uplink transmission using the multi-resource unit in a lower 160 MHz bandwidth, in response to the second identifier being set to a second value corresponding to a bandwidth of 160 MHz and the third identifier being set to a third value corresponding to a lower frequency band (Fig. 9, [0100]-[0101], [0105]: STA receives the trigger frame identifying the multi-user resource unit allocation and communicates with the AP on the one or more resources allocated to the STA. Fig. 3A, [0057]: the bandwidth may be 160 MHz and the spatial reuse bits may be SRP values for first, second, third, and fourth 40 MHz channel arranged in increasing order of absolute frequency); or
performing uplink transmission using the multi-resource unit in a higher 160 MHz bandwidth, in response to the second identifier being set to the second value corresponding to the bandwidth of 160 MHz and the third identifier being set to a fourth value corresponding to a higher frequency band (Fig. 9, [0100]-[0101], [0105]: STA receives the trigger frame identifying the multi-user resource unit allocation and communicates with the AP on the one or more resources allocated to the STA. Fig. 3A, [0057]: the bandwidth may be 160 MHz and the spatial reuse bits may be SRP values for first, second, third, and fourth 40 MHz channel arranged in increasing order of absolute frequency).
Regarding claims 11 and 23, Verma in view of Jang discloses all features of claim(s) 1 and 13 as outlined above.
Verma discloses wherein the multi-resource unit is assigned in one of: a bandwidth less than or equal to 160 MHz or a bandwidth of 160+160 MHz or 320 MHz (Fig. 4: MU RU allocation may include possible RU cases in 80 MHz and 160 MHz).
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 extension fee 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 date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to THE HY NGUYEN whose telephone number is (571)270-3813. The examiner can normally be reached on Mo-Fr: 8am-4pm.
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, Joseph Avellino, can be reached on (571) 272-3905. 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.
/THE HY NGUYEN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2478
TheHy.Nguyen@USPTO.gov
Prosecution Insights