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 arguments with respect to claim(s) 1, 8, and 10 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.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
Claim(s) 1, 8, and 10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over CHHABRA (US 20080123558 A1, hereinafter, "CHHABRA") in view of HONJO, et al. (US 20070091864 A1, hereinafter, "HONJO") and SHINOHARA, et al. (US 20240305555 A1, hereinafter, "SHINOHARA").
Regarding claim 1, CHHABRA teaches a communication apparatus comprising:
CHHABRA writes, “FIG. 1 is a block level diagram of an exemplary wireless device, or station, that
supports simplified auto-configuration and service discovery in ad-hoc networks” (paragraph 0023).
communication circuitry configured to transmit and receive directional communication media;
CHHABRA writes, “Message parsing unit 118 may receive a message from network physical layer unit
110 and may parse the received message content to retrieve data that may be passed to controller 102
and/or local data store 112” (paragraph 0029). CHHABRA adds, “Message generating unit 116 may, at
the instruction of controller 102, generate an ad-hoc message for transmission to stations within radio
broadcast range” (paragraph 0031).
and at least one processor,
CHHABRA writes, “Functions performed by controller 102, and subsequent layers of the OSI model, or
other network communication model, may be performed by software executed, for example, by a
general microprocessor in electronic devices such as a desktop or a laptop computer, or may be
executed, for example, by a separate processor in electronic devices such as printers, digital cameras,
and scanners” (paragraph 0025).
a memory storing instructions, which when executed by the at least one processor individually or collectively, cause the communication apparatus to carry out operations comprising:
CHHABRA writes, “Non-volatile memory 106, may allow controller 102 to access and retrieve larger bodies of data and program instructions for later execution by the controller” (paragraph 0026).
providing, to at least one communication destination with which to communicate by the communication circuitry, use information pertaining to a purpose of connection;
CHHABRA writes, “In step S1012, controller 102 may instruct message generating unit 118 to generate a
probe-response and to store the generated probe-response within the transmission message buffer. For
example, if the probe-request included a list of desired service UUIDs, and the controller determines
that the receiving station or a peer station listed in the receiving station's local data store may provide
the requested service, the controller may instruct message generating unit 118 to construct a probe-
response containing records retrieved from the local data store pertaining to the one or more stations
capable of providing the desired service. Similarly, if the probe-request included a list of user-friendly
names, and the controller determines that one of the received user-friendly names corresponds to the
receiving station or a peer station listed in the receiving station's local data store, the controller may
instruct message generating unit 118 to construct a probe-response containing records retrieved from
the local data store pertaining to the one or more desired user-friendly names. In such a manner, the
receiving station may efficiently provide both a name resolution service and a service discovery service
for peer stations of the ad-hoc network” (paragraph 0082). CHHABRA indicates the controller uses a
probe-request with a list of desired service UUIDs to determine a receiving or peer station listed in the
receiving station's local data store that may provide the requested service.
acquiring, from the at least one communication destination and as a response to the use information, related information related to the at least one communication destination;
CHHABRA writes, “In step S1018, controller 102 may instruct message generating unit 116 to generate,
and store within the transmission message buffer, a probe-request message containing parameters
requesting the needed information and the information element described above with respect to Table
2, and processing proceeds to step S1020” (paragraph 0084). CHHABRA adds, “In step S614, the
message parsing unit 118 parses the incoming message and may provide retrieved information, e.g.,
MAC address, IBSS timestamp, information element contents, etc., to the controller 102 and/or to local
data store unit 112, and processing proceeds to step S616” (paragraph 0045).
determining connection to, or disconnection from, the at least one communication destination with reference to the related information related to the at least one communication destination,
CHHABRA writes, “If, in step S1010, controller 102 determines that the local station holds information
and/or is capable of providing services requested by the probe-request, processing proceeds to step
S1012, otherwise processing proceeds to step S1014” (paragraph 0081). CHHABRA adds, “In step S612,
the controller determines whether an ad-hoc message has been received from another compatible
device. If a message has been received, processing proceeds to step S614, otherwise processing
proceeds to step S618” (paragraph 0044).
wherein: the use information includes information pertaining to whether the purpose of connection is a first purpose or a second purpose different from the first purpose,
CHHABRA writes, “For example, if the probe-request included a list of desired service UUIDs, and the controller determines that the receiving station or a peer station listed in the receiving station's local data store may provide the requested service, the controller may instruct message generating unit 118 to construct a probe-response containing records retrieved from the local data store pertaining to the one or more stations capable of providing the desired service” (paragraph 0082).
CHHABRA fails to explicitly disclose information regarding, “and in a case where the use information indicates that the purpose of connection is the second purpose: the communication apparatus acquires, as the response to the use information, information pertaining to a number of established connections in which the at least one communication destination is involved,” and “and the communication apparatus determines, as the at least one communication destination that has more connections which have been established and which are in use.”
However, in analogous art, HONJO teaches and in a case where the use information indicates that the purpose of connection is the second purpose: the communication apparatus acquires, as the response to the use information, information pertaining to a number of established connections in which the at least one communication destination is involved,
HONJO writes, “Accordingly, if the number of wireless terminals connected with a wireless access point
(hereinafter, referred to as `the number of access-point-connected terminals), the transmission rate
that can be supplied by the wireless access point, and the packet error rate when communicating with
the wireless access point can be known, it is possible to calculate the communication throughput when
communicating with the wireless access point” (paragraph 0074). HONJO continues, “Here, since the
number of access-point-connected terminals is information of the wireless access point, the wireless
terminal cannot know the number of access-point-connected terminals. For this reason, the number of
access-point-connected terminals needs to be notified from a wireless access point to a wireless
terminal by using a predetermined method. For example, it is possible to consider a method of notifying
the wireless terminal of the number of access-point-connected terminals by using a beacon or a probe
response from a wireless access point. That is, the wireless terminal may discover a wireless access point
by receiving a beacon frame from the wireless access point or by requesting the wireless access point of
a probe response and then receiving the probe response frame from the wireless access point. Thus, a
variety of information on the wireless access point may be obtained. Accordingly, it is considered that
the number of access-point-connected terminals is notified by using these frames described above”
(paragraph 0075). HONJO indicates the wireless terminal acquires information pertaining to the number
of established connections.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the method and invention of CHHABRA to include aspects described by HONJO that “relates to a wireless apparatus, which performs communication using radio, such as a wireless LAN (local area network), and a method of selecting a wireless access point.” HONJO provides the motivation for modification stating, “According to an aspect of the invention, a wireless apparatus that selects one of a plurality of wireless access points so as to perform wireless communication therewith is configured to include: a scanning unit that scans accessible wireless access points; a calculating unit that calculates an estimated communication efficiency value of each wireless access point on the basis of received signal strength, interference signal strength, and interference adjacency of each of the scanned wireless access points; and a selecting unit that selects one of the scanned wireless access points on the basis of the estimated communication efficiency values calculated by the calculating unit” (paragraph 0015).
CHHABRA and HONJO fail to explicitly disclose information regarding, “and the communication apparatus determines, as the at least one communication destination that has more connections which have been established and which are in use.”
However, in analogous art, SHINOHARA teaches and the communication apparatus determines, as the at least one communication destination that has more connections which have been established and which are in use.
SHINOHARA writes, “In step S25, the determination unit 114 determines whether or not the base station to be the connection destination of the terminal can be designated by a connection destination ID. A connection destination ID is, for example, an SSID. If the connection destination can be designated by a connection destination ID, the processing proceeds to step S26. On the other hand, if the connection destination cannot be designated by a connection destination ID, such as a case where the same SSID is assigned to the entire network, it is necessary to distinguish the connection destination by the RSSI value or the like, and thus the processing proceeds to step S27” (paragraph 0121). SHINOHARA continues, “In step S26, the update unit 155 registers the connection destination IDs of the terminals 300 and the relay base stations 210 as control values” (paragraph 0122).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the method and invention of CHHABRA and HONJO to include aspects described by SHINOHARA that “relates to a wireless communication management apparatus, a wireless communication management method, and a wireless communication management program.” SHINOHARA provides the motivation for modification stating, “According to an embodiment, means for managing optimal path selection may be provided” (paragraph 0010).
Claims 8 and 10 are system and method claims corresponding to the apparatus claim 1 that has
already been rejected above. The applicant’s attention is directed to the rejection of claim 1. Claims 8
and 10 are rejected under the same rational as claim 1.
Claim(s) 3-4 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over CHHABRA, HONJO, and SHINOHARA as applied to claim1 above, and further in view of ZHANG, et al. (WO 2014179722 A1, hereinafter, "ZHANG").
Regarding claim 3, CHHABRA, HONJO, and SHINOHARA teach the communication apparatus according to claim 1,
CHHABRA, HONJO, and SHINOHARA fail to explicitly disclose information regarding, “wherein in a case where the use information indicates that the purpose of connection is the first purpose: the communication apparatus acquires, as the response to the use information, information pertaining to a connection state of connection in which the at least one communication destination is involved.”
However, in analogous art, ZHANG teaches wherein in a case where the use information indicates that the purpose of connection is the first purpose: the communication apparatus acquires, as the response to the use information, information pertaining to a connection state of connection in which the at least one communication destination is involved.
ZHANG writes, “A flow control mechanism at the relay may be provided. A support to use probe request
for relay discovery may be provided, which may include information on AP- STA link budget. A STA may
initiate a discovery process. The STA may select a relay based on one or more received probe responses”
(paragraph 0068). ZHANG continues, “FIG. 9 depicts an example frame format of a transmission, where
one bit in the frame control field of the transmission may indicate that the transmitter is a relay node
(e.g., instead of a root AP). The transmission may be a short beacon frame. A transmission indicating
that the transmitter is a relay node may be a beacon frame or a probe response frame (e.g., the short
beacon frame or probe response frame may include similar fields as described in the example of the
short beacon frame). When the frame control field is set to a value of 1, the transmitter may be a relay
node. When the frame control field is set to a value 0, the transmitter may be a non-relay node”
(paragraph 0084). ZHANG indicates the use of a probe request discovery that may include information
on the link budget. ZHANG explains the frame format of a transmission may include a frame control field
indicating the status of the connection, relay node or root AP.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the method and invention of CHHABRA to include aspects described by ZHANG where “systems, methods, and instrumentalities are disclosed for a station to determine a link quality.” ZHANG provides the motivation for modification stating, “The STA may select an entity to associate with based on the total link quality. The STA may use the total link quality to determine whether to send data to the root AP via the relay or to send data to the root AP directly. For example, the STA may determine whether the total link quality satisfies a requirement (e.g., whether the total link quality is better than the quality of a link between the STA and the root AP, whether the total link quality is above a threshold such as a SNR threshold, etc.). The STA may select to associate with the relay node in order to transmit to the root AP when the total link quality satisfies the requirement” (paragraph 0005).
Regarding claim 4, CHHABRA, HONJO, SHINOHARA, and ZHANG teach the communication apparatus according to claim 3,
Additionally, ZHANG teaches wherein the connection state of the connection in which the at least one communication destination is involved includes at least one of: a line quality of the connection in which the at least one communication destination is involved; a number of times of disconnection in the connection in which the at least one communication destination is involved; and delay time in the connection in which the at least one communication destination is involved.
ZHANG writes, “As depicted in FIG. 9, a bit in the frame control field of the transmission may indicate
the presence of the link quality between relay and root- AP field in the transmission. The frame control
field bit set to a value of 1 may mean that the field is present and a value of 0 may mean that the field is
absent. A reserved bit in the frame control field may be used to indicate the presence of the link quality
between relay and root- AP field. The link quality present field or relay indicator field may be implicitly
signaled (e.g., by methods such as CRC masking, scrambler initiation seeds values, relative phase
changes in SIG fields, or pilot values or patterns in the PLCP header). The link quality presence bit or
relay indication bit in the frame control field may indicate that the link quality between relay and the
root AP may be included in the transmission. One or more octets may be used for the link quality
between relay and root-AP field. The link quality between relay and root-AP field may represent 64 to
4096 levels of link quality in the units of dB. The link quality between relay and root-AP field may
indicate the link quality (e.g., path loss, packet error/loss rate, transmission latency and etc.) between a
relay node and a root-AP. A link quality (e.g., an incremental link quality) estimate may be incremental
to that indicated for the overall AP to STA link quality” (paragraph 0084). ZHANG continues, “FIG. 10
depicts an example frame format of a transmission, where the link quality between the relay and root -
AP may be signaled (e.g., explicitly signaled) by an IE (e.g., a link quality between relay and root -AP IE).
The transmission may be a short beacon frame. A transmission signaling the link quality between the
relay and root-AP may be a beacon frame or a probe response frame (e.g., the short beacon frame or
probe response frame may include similar fields as described in the example of the short beacon frame).
The IE may be included in the transmission (e.g., a beacon frame, a short beacon frame, or a probe
response frame)” (paragraph 0085). ZHANG indicates based on the status of the connection the link
quality between relay and root- AP field is taken into account. The link quality between relay and the
root AP may be included in the transmission. A transmission signaling the link quality between the relay
and root-AP may be a probe response frame. ZHANG notes that the IE may be included in the
transmission and a link quality estimate may be incremental to that indicated for the overall AP to STA
link quality.
Claim(s) 6-7, 9, and 11 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over CHHABRA, HONJO, and SHINOHARA as applied to claims 1, 8, and 10 above, and further in view of HUANG, et al. (US 20190281608 A1, hereinafter, "HUANG").
Regarding claim 6, CHHABRA, HONJO, and SHINOHARA teach the communication apparatus according to claim 1,
CHHABRA, HONJO, and SHINOHARA fail to explicitly disclose information regarding, “wherein the communication apparatus determines, with reference to hop count information included in the related information related to the at least one communication destination, connection with a communication destination that has a smaller hop count to a connection reference point.”
However, in analogous art, HUANG teaches wherein the communication apparatus determines, with reference to hop count information included in the related information related to the at least one communication destination, connection with a communication destination that has a smaller hop count to a connection reference point.
HUANG writes, “The root AP 110 may divide the satellite APs of the entire network into a number of
groups based on the number of hops to the root AP 110 (901). The root AP 110 may initialize the
estimated usage level of each of a set of available channels of the APs 111-116 to zero (902), and may
order the groups of APs for channel selection operations based on a number of hops to the root AP 110
(903). Performing channel selection operations for groups of APs that are closer to the root AP 110
before performing channel selection operations for groups of APs that are further from the root AP 110
may optimize channel planning operations, for example, because groups of APs having fewer numbers
of hops to the root AP 110 typically have a larger impact on network performance than groups of APs
having greater numbers of hops to the root AP 110. The root AP 110 may iteratively perform channel
selection operations on each group of APs based on the ordering (904)” (paragraph 0120-0122).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the method and invention of CHHABRA, HONJO, and SHINOHARA to include aspects described by HUANG that “relates generally to wireless networks, and specifically to planning channel allocations in a wireless network having multiple access points.” HUANG provides the motivation for modification stating, “Thus, when selecting a channel, the first AP 111 may benefit from obtaining channel condition information that is observable by other APs in the network (even if some of the channel conditions are not directly observable by the first AP 111). Furthermore, by coordinating enhanced channel selection between the first AP 111 and the root AP 110, the root AP 110 may select a better channel to maximize channel reuse within the network, such as when overlapping coverage areas are unavoidable. Maximizing channel reuse may improve the overall network capacity” (paragraph 0045).
Claims 7, 9, and 11 are claims corresponding to the apparatus claim 6 that has already been
rejected above. The applicant’s attention is directed to the rejection of claim 6. Claims 7, 9, and 11 are
rejected under the same rational as claim 6.
Claims 2 and 5 have been cancelled by the applicant, respectfully.
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to CHRISTOPHER A REYES whose telephone number is (703)756-4558. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 8:30 - 5:00 EDT.
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, KHALED KASSIM can be reached at (571) 270-3770. 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.
/Christopher A. Reyes/Examiner, Art Unit 2475 3/3/2026
/KHALED M KASSIM/supervisory patent examiner, Art Unit 2475