DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
This Office Action is in response to the Reply filed on January 14, 2026.
Claims 1-20 remain pending in the application.
Response to Arguments
Claims 1-8 and 11-19 have been amended to no longer include limitations that invoke the interpretation under 35 U.S.C. §112(f). As such, amended claims 1-8 and 11-19 are no longer interpreted under 35 U.S.C. §112(f) and the rejection under 35 U.S.C. §112(b) of claims 1-8 and 11-19 has been withdrawn.
On page 9 of the Reply, the Applicant submits that claims are amended such that the rejection on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting is moot. The rejection has been withdrawn.
Applicant’s arguments with respect to the rejection under 35 U.S.C. §102 of claim(s) 1, 10, 11, and 20 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.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on March 31, 2026 is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
Specification
The Applicant amended the Title to “COMMUNICATION DEVICE AND COMMUNICATION METHOD FOR DETERMINING AN OPTIMUM LINK BASED UPON A DEVICE RESTRICTION”. The amended Title, filed on January 14, 2026, is acceptable.
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 (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) 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.
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.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claims 1-8, 10-17, 19, and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over U.S. Pub. No. 2020/0068561 (Cited in 08/13/2024 IDS, hereinafter “Lan”) in view of U.S. Pub. No. 2022/0394756 (hereinafter “Jang”).
Regarding claim 1, Lan discloses or suggests a communication device (see at least paragraphs 43-44, access point (AP) 202) comprising:
processing circuitry configured to (see at least paragraph 44, the AP includes one or more processors and one or more memory resources that stores instructions for performing operations):
determine an optimum link for each of a plurality of reception-side communication devices (see at least Fig. 2B, paragraphs 45-47, 50, and 54, the AP determines an optimum channel for STAs 1, 2, 4-6, and 8 based on the AP receiving a BQR indicating that an assigned channel is available to STAs 1, 2, 4-6, and 8); and
perform control to simultaneously transmit data using the optimum link to each of the plurality of reception-side communication devices (see at least Fig. 2B, paragraphs 45-47, 50, and 54, the AP processes and transmits data simultaneously to STAs 1, 2, 4-6, and 8 using the optimum channel to STAs 1, 2, 4-6, and 8).
Lan does not explicitly disclose determining an optimum link based upon a device restriction of at least one of the plurality of reception-side communication devices, the device restriction being based on a property of the at least one of the plurality of reception-side communication devices itself.
However, in an analogous art, Jang discloses or suggests determining an optimum link based upon a device restriction of at least one of the plurality of reception-side communication devices, the device restriction being based on a property of the at least one of the plurality of reception-side communication devices itself (see at least Fig. 23, Fig. 26, and paragraphs 261, 268, and 319-330, certain legacy STAs may be aggregated/grouped/gathered into one link, where legacy STAs (e.g., 5GHz only or 6GHz only) are assigned Link 1 based on the legacy STAs being restricted to 5GHz only or 6GHz only).
Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to implement the technique as taught by Jang in to the invention of Lan in order to optimize the bandwidth usage of the communication system.
Lan further discloses or suggests:
regarding claim 2, the processing circuitry is configured to perform control to transmit a trigger request signal for requesting information regarding a reception opportunity from the plurality of reception-side communication devices on a link on which a transmission opportunity has been acquired (see at least paragraphs 40, 45, and 53, the AP sends the BQRP frame to the STAs, where the BQRP includes resource allocation information and triggers a STA to respond a BQR upon receiving the BQRP frame);
regarding claim 3, the processing circuitry is configured to perform control to receive a request response signal for responding to the trigger request signal (see at least paragraphs 47 and 54, the AP receives BQRs responding to the BQRP frames);
regarding claim 4, the processing circuitry is configured to determine an optimum link for each reception-side communication device on a basis of the request response signal from the plurality of reception-side communication devices (see at least paragraphs 47, 53, and 54, the use of a BQRP frame enables all the recipients of the BQRP frame to respond with a corresponding BQR including the corresponding resource/channel availability, which corresponds to an optimum link for each STA);
regarding claim 5, the processing circuitry is configured to determine an optimum link for each reception-side communication device with a request response signal received from a reception-side communication device having large restriction on a communication resource prioritized (see at least paragraph 47, when the AP receives a BQR from a station indicating that an assigned channel is not available, the AP assigns another channel to the station and sends another BQRP frame indicating the updated channel assignment, where the unavailability of the first assigned channel corresponds to large striction on a communication resource);
regarding claim 6, the processing circuitry is configured to perform control to transmit an allocation signal including information regarding a link allocated to each reception-side communication device and information regarding multi-user multiplex communication (see at least paragraphs 40, 45, and 53, the AP transmits a BQRP frame assigning each STA to a frequency channel and determine a channel availability of a corresponding frequency channel, where the assigned frequency channel corresponds to information regarding multi-user multiplex communication);
regarding claim 7, the processing circuitry is configured to control simultaneous data transmission to the plurality of reception-side communication devices on a basis of information regarding a link allocated to each reception-side communication device and information regarding multi-user multiplex communication (see at least Fig. 2B, paragraphs 40, 45-47, 50, and 54, the AP processes and transmits data to STAs 1, 2, 4-6, and 8 upon receiving the BQRs indicating the assigned channels are available, where the data transmission to STAs 1, 2, 4-6, and 8 correspond to multi-user multiplex communication); and
regarding claim 8, the processing circuitry is configured to perform control to allocate a resource for receiving block ACK from the plurality of reception-side communication devices (see at least Fig. 2B and paragraph 54, the STAs 1, 2, 4-6, and 8 transmits block acknowledgement (BA) back to the AP on the corresponding frequency channel assigned to each STA).
Regarding claim 10, Lan discloses or suggests a communication method in a communication device capable of wirelessly communicating on a plurality of links (see at least paragraphs 43-44, access point (AP) 202), the method comprising:
determining an optimum link for each of a plurality of reception-side communication devices (see at least Fig. 2B, paragraphs 45-47, 50, and 54, the AP determines an optimum channel for STAs 1, 2, 4-6, and 8 based on the AP receiving a BQR indicating that an assigned channel is available to STAs 1, 2, 4-6, and 8); and
simultaneously transmitting data using the optimum link to each of the plurality of reception-side communication devices (see at least Fig. 2B, paragraphs 45-47, 50, and 54, the AP processes and transmits data simultaneously to STAs 1, 2, 4-6, and 8 using the optimum channel to STAs 1, 2, 4-6, and 8).
Lan does not explicitly disclose determining an optimum link based upon a device restriction of at least one of the plurality of reception-side communication devices, the device restriction being based on a property of the at least one of the plurality of reception-side communication devices itself.
However, in an analogous art, Jang discloses or suggests determining an optimum link based upon a device restriction of at least one of the plurality of reception-side communication devices, the device restriction being based on a property of the at least one of the plurality of reception-side communication devices itself (see at least Fig. 23, Fig. 26, and paragraphs 261, 268, and 319-330, certain legacy STAs may be aggregated/grouped/gathered into one link, where legacy STAs (e.g., 5GHz only or 6GHz only) are assigned Link 1 based on the legacy STAs being restricted to 5GHz only or 6GHz only).
Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to implement the technique as taught by Jang in to the invention of Lan in order to optimize the bandwidth usage of the communication system.
Regarding claim 11, Lan discloses or suggests a communication device (see at least paragraph 43, station (STA)) comprising:
processing circuitry configured to (see at least paragraph 44, the STA includes one or more processors and one or more memory resources that stores instructions for performing operations):
notify a transmission-side communication device of a reception opportunity of a link available to the communication device (see at least Fig. 2B, paragraphs 45-47, 50, and 54, each of STAs 1, 2, 4-6, and 8 transmits a BQR to the AP indicating the assigned channels are available and each of STAs 1, 2, 4-6, and 8 receives data transmission from the AP on the assigned channels); and
control to receive data addressed to the communication device among data simultaneously transmitted from the transmission-side communication device to a plurality of reception-side communication devices on an optimum link determined based on the reception opportunity (see at least Fig. 2B, paragraphs 45-47, 50, and 54, each of STAs 1, 2, 4-6, and 8 receives data addressed to each of STAs 1, 2, 4-6, and 8, where the AP transmits data simultaneously to STAs 1, 2, 4-6, and 8 using the optimum channel to STAs 1, 2, 4-6, and 8 upon receiving the BQRs indicating the assigned channels are available).
Lan does not explicitly disclose an optimum link determined based upon a device restriction of at least one of the plurality of reception-side communication devices, the device restriction being notified by the communication device and based on a property of the at least one of the plurality of reception-side communication devices itself.
However, in an analogous art, Jang discloses or suggests determining an optimum link based upon a device restriction of at least one of the plurality of reception-side communication devices, the device restriction being notified by the communication device and based on a property of the at least one of the plurality of reception-side communication devices itself (see at least Fig. 23, Fig. 26, and paragraphs 261, 268, and 319-330, certain legacy STAs may be aggregated/grouped/gathered into one link, where legacy STAs (e.g., 5GHz only or 6GHz only) are assigned Link 1 or Link 3, respectively, based on the legacy STAs being restricted to 5GHz only or 6GHz only, where the AP MLD must be notified of the legacy STAs being restricted to 5GHz only or 6GHz only, prior to assigning the legacy STAs to Link 1 or Link 3 respectively).
Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to implement the technique as taught by Jang in to the invention of Lan in order to optimize the bandwidth usage of the communication system.
Lan further discloses or suggests:
regarding claim 12, the processing circuitry is configured to perform control to return a request response signal on a link on which a reception opportunity can be acquired in response to reception of a trigger request signal from the transmission-side communication device (see at least paragraphs 40, 45, and 53, each of STAs 1, 2, 4-6, and 8 transmits a BQR to the AP, where the AP sends the BQRP frame to the STAs, where the BQRP includes resource allocation information and triggers a STA to respond a BQR upon receiving the BQRP frame);
regarding claim 13, the processing circuitry is configured to perform control to return a request response signal on an all link on which a reception opportunity has been able to be acquired (see at least paragraphs 47 and 54, each of STAs 1, 2, 4-6, and 8 sends a BQR responding to the BQRP frame, where the BQR indicates the assigned channels are available);
regarding claim 14, the processing circuitry is configured to perform control to transmit a Clear to Send signal on a link on which reception is performed in a case where a large restriction on a communication resource exists (see at least Fig. 2B and paragraph 52, STA1 transmits a CTS on channel 1, where STA1 is restricted to communicating on channel 1, as shown in Fig. 2B);
regarding claim 15, the processing circuitry is configured to perform control to wait for reception of data addressed to a plurality of reception-side communication devices from the transmission-side communication device on a link on which the request response signal has been transmitted (see at least Fig. 2B, paragraphs 45-47, 50, and 54, each of STAs 1, 2, 4-6, and 8 receives data transmission from an access point (AP) after transmitting the BQRs indicating the assigned channels are available);
regarding claim 16, the processing circuitry is configured to perform control to return block ACK to the transmission-side communication device (see at least Fig. 2B and paragraph 54, the STAs 1, 2, 4-6, and 8 transmits block acknowledgement (BA) back to the AP on the corresponding frequency channel assigned to each STA);
regarding claim 17, the processing circuitry is configured to perform control to transmit the block ACK using a resource allocated from the transmission-side communication device (see at least Fig. 2B and paragraph 54, the STAs 1, 2, 4-6, and 8 transmits block acknowledgement (BA) back to the AP on the corresponding frequency channel assigned to each STA); and
regarding claim 19, the processing circuitry is configured to return information regarding the reception opportunity of the communication device in a case where there is a remaining time of a transmission opportunity of the transmission-side communication device each of STAs 1, 2, 4-6, and 8 sends a BQR responding to the BQRP frame, where the BQR indicates the assigned channels are available, where the BQR is sent when there is a remaining time of a transmission opportunity (i.e., NAV), as shown in Fig. 2B).
Regarding claim 20, Lan discloses or suggests a communication method in a communication device capable of wirelessly communicating on a plurality of links, the method comprising:
notifying a transmission-side communication device of information regarding a reception opportunity of a link available to the communication device (see at least Fig. 2B, paragraphs 45-47, 50, and 54, each of STAs 1, 2, 4-6, and 8 transmits a BQR to the AP indicating the assigned channels are available and each of STAs 1, 2, 4-6, and 8 receives data transmission from the AP on the assigned channels); and
receiving data addressed to the communication device among data simultaneously transmitted from the transmission-side communication device to a plurality of reception-side communication devices (see at least Fig. 2B, paragraphs 45-47, 50, and 54, each of STAs 1, 2, 4-6, and 8 receives data addressed to each of STAs 1, 2, 4-6, and 8, where the AP transmits data simultaneously to STAs 1, 2, 4-6, and 8 using the optimum channel to STAs 1, 2, 4-6, and 8 upon receiving the BQRs indicating the assigned channels are available).
Lan does not explicitly disclose an optimum link determined based upon a device restriction of at least one of the plurality of reception-side communication devices, the device restriction being notified by the communication device and based on a property of the at least one of the plurality of reception-side communication devices itself.
However, in an analogous art, Jang discloses or suggests determining an optimum link based upon a device restriction of at least one of the plurality of reception-side communication devices, the device restriction being notified by the communication device and based on a property of the at least one of the plurality of reception-side communication devices itself (see at least Fig. 23, Fig. 26, and paragraphs 261, 268, and 319-330, certain legacy STAs may be aggregated/grouped/gathered into one link, where legacy STAs (e.g., 5GHz only or 6GHz only) are assigned Link 1 or Link 3, respectively, based on the legacy STAs being restricted to 5GHz only or 6GHz only, where the AP MLD must be notified of the legacy STAs being restricted to 5GHz only or 6GHz only, prior to assigning the legacy STAs to Link 1 or Link 3 respectively).
Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to implement the technique as taught by Jang in to the invention of Lan in order to optimize the bandwidth usage of the communication system.
Claim 9 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lan in view of Jang, and further in view of U.S. Pub. No. 2015/0063251 (hereinafter “Asterjadhi”).
Regarding claim 9, Lan, as modified by Jang, discloses all of the subject matter of the claimed invention except repeatedly transmitting the allocation signal in a case where there is a remaining time of the transmission opportunity.
However, in an analogous art, Asterjadhi discloses or suggests repeatedly transmitting the allocation signal in a case where there is a remaining time of the transmission opportunity (see at least paragraph 60, the time remaining in the transmission opportunity may be allocated to one or more other wireless devices).
Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to implement the technique as taught by Asterjadhi in to the invention of Lan, as modified by Jang, in order to improve the resource utilization by allowing other wireless devices to communicate during the remaining time of the transmission opportunity.
Claim 18 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lan in view of Jang, and further in view of U.S. Pub. No. 2017/0180088 (hereinafter “Adachi”).
Regarding claim 18, Lan, as modified by Jang, discloses all of the subject matter of the claimed invention except performing signal waiting processing in a case where data retransmission from the transmission-side communication device is necessary.
However, in an analogous art, Adachi discloses or suggests performing signal waiting processing in a case where data retransmission from the transmission-side communication device is necessary (see at least paragraphs 233 and 234, retransmission is performed at the transmission-side communication device and, therefore, the communication device performs signal waiting processing in a case where data retransmission is performed).
Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to implement the retransmission technique as taught by Adachi in to the invention of Lan, as modified by Jang, in order to prevent data loss by waiting to receive a retransmission of data.
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 Pawaris Sinkantarakorn whose telephone number is (571)270-1424. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 8:00am-4:00pm.
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, Hadi Armouche can be reached at (571) 270-3618. 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.
/PAO SINKANTARAKORN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2409 04/30/2026
Prosecution Insights