Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/292,668

MULTI-LINK COMMUNICATION METHOD AND MULTI-LINK COMMUNICATION APPARATUS

Non-Final OA §102§103
Filed
Jan 26, 2024
Examiner
CARDONE, JASON D
Art Unit
2458
Tech Center
2400 — Computer Networks
Assignee
BEIJING XIAOMI MOBILE SOFTWARE CO., LTD.
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
90%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
2y 3m
To Grant
67%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 90% — above average
90%
Career Allow Rate
28 granted / 31 resolved
+32.3% vs TC avg
Minimal -23% lift
Without
With
+-23.1%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 3m
Avg Prosecution
24 currently pending
Career history
55
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
6.0%
-34.0% vs TC avg
§103
59.6%
+19.6% vs TC avg
§102
15.7%
-24.3% vs TC avg
§112
11.5%
-28.5% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 31 resolved cases

Office Action

§102 §103
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 . Information Disclosure Statement The information disclosure statement (IDS) was submitted on 01/26/2024. The submission is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner. Claim Objections Claims 2, 7, 8, and 21 are objected to because of the following informalities: Claim 2 states “Peer Trafffic Indication”, which is a misspelling of “traffic”. Claims 7, 8, and 21 state anagrams (ie. “PTI”, “TPU”). These anagrams should be spelled out, like shown in the other claims. Appropriate correction is required. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102 The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action: A person shall be entitled to a patent unless – (a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention. Claims 1, 5, 6, 10, 13, 18, and 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Chu et al. (“Chu”) [PGPUB 2021/0211871]. Regarding claim 1, the Chu reference discloses a multi-link communication method, comprising: determining a first message frame on one link of multiple links [Chu; figures 1 and 5A; paragraphs 0046 and 0069-0071], wherein the first message frame comprises identification information for indicating that data is buffered for a device in a sleep state on at least one link of the multiple links [“for indicating” is intended use of the identification information; ie. frame contains another link information indicating Unscheduled Automatic Power Save Delivery (U-APSD) for a sleep STA (“buffered frames for a device in a sleep state”); Chu; fig 5A and 6; para 0056 and 0076-0079], and a Tunneled Direct Link Setup (TDLS) function is supported on the at least one link [Chu; para 0069, 0073, and 0076]; and sending the first message frame [ie. “a frame transmitted on a first link among the multiple links”; Chu; fig 8; para 0056, 0059, and 0079-0080]. Regarding claim 5, the Chu reference further discloses at least one of: sending a second message frame; or receiving a third message frame, wherein at least one of the second message frame and the third message frame comprises information identifying support for a multi-link communication [ie. response message frame; Chu; fig 8; para 0046-0048]. Regarding claim 6, the Chu reference discloses a multi-link communication method, comprising: receiving a first message frame on one link of multiple links, wherein the first message frame comprises identification information for indicating that data is buffered for a device in a sleep state on at least one link of the multiple links, and a Tunneled Direct Link Setup (TDLS) function is supported on the at least one link [“for indicating” is intended use of the identification information; ie. frame contains another link information indicating Unscheduled Automatic Power Save Delivery (U-APSD) for a sleep STA (“buffered frames for a device in a sleep state”); Chu; fig 5A and 6; para 0056, 0069, 0073, and 0076-0079]; and performing a communication operation based on the first message frame [ie. responding to the first message frame (“communication operation”); Chu; para 0046-0048]. Regarding claim 10, the Chu reference further discloses at least one of: sending a second message frame; or receiving a third message frame, wherein at least one of the second message frame and the third message frame comprises information identifying support for a multi-link communication [ie. response message frame; Chu; fig 8; para 0046-0048]. Regarding claims 13, 18, and 19, the apparatus of claims 13, 18, and 19 perform the similar steps as the method of claims 1, 5, and 6. The Chu reference teaches the method of claims 1, 5, and 6, as referenced above. The additional limitations of an “electronic device”, a “memory”, and a “processor” are rejected with the citation of paragraphs 0043 and 0086 of Chu. Therefore, claims 13, 18, and 19 are rejected using the same art and rationale set forth above in the rejection of claims 1, 5, and 6, by the teachings of Chu. 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 2, 7, and 15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chu in view of Seok [PGPUB 2011/0188429] and Li et al. (“LI”) [PGPUB 2016/0100443]. Regarding claim 2, the Chu reference discloses the identification information comprises a Peer Traffic Indication (PTI) information element [ie. “TDLS peer traffic indication of one link”; Chu; para 0079-0080]. Also, the Chu reference discloses BSSID, traffic ID, and packet number [Chu; para 0062 and 0072-0073] but does not specifically disclose “the PTI information element comprises: a basic service set identifier or link identification corresponding to each link of the at least one link, a transmission identifier, and sequence number control information; and the transmission identifier indicates a traffic buffered for the device in the sleep state on a respective link”. However, in the same field of endeavor, the Seok reference discloses a Peer Traffic Indication (PTI) information element comprises: a transmission identifier, sequence number control information and the transmission identifier indicates a traffic buffered for the device in the sleep state on a respective link [Seok; abstract; fig 2 and 4; para 0012-0013, 0027, 0030, and 0089]. The Chu and Seok references are analogous art, since they have similar problem solving area in being able to support a tunneled direct link setup (TDLS) in a WLAN system. It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filling date of the claimed invention, to combine the teaching of more specific data within the PTI, taught by Seok, into the system, taught by Chu. The motivation for doing so would have been to have multiple element identifications within one element (PTI), in order to reduce data being transferred. The combination of Chu-Seok does not specifically disclose the “PTI information element comprises: a basic service set identifier or link identification corresponding to each link of the at least one link”. However, in the same field of endeavor, the Li reference discloses the PTI information element comprises: a basic service set identifier or link identification corresponding to each link of the at least one link [Li; Table 1; para 0008-0009]. The Chu-Seok and Li references are analogous art, since they have similar problem solving area in being able to manage device to device transmission. It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filling date of the claimed invention, to combine the teaching of BSSID, taught by Li, into the system, taught by Chu-Seok. The motivation for doing so would have been to have indicating which TDLS link. Regarding claim 7, the Chu reference discloses the identification information comprises a Peer Traffic Indication (PTI) information element [ie. “TDLS peer traffic indication of one link”; Chu; para 0079-0080]. Also, the Chu reference discloses BSSID, traffic ID, and packet number [Chu; para 0062 and 0072-0073] but does not specifically disclose “the PTI information element comprises: a basic service set identifier or link identification corresponding to each link of the at least one link, a transmission identifier, and sequence number control information; and the transmission identifier indicates a traffic buffered for the device in the sleep state on a respective link”. However, in the same field of endeavor, the Seok reference discloses a Peer Traffic Indication (PTI) information element comprises: a transmission identifier, sequence number control information and the transmission identifier indicates a traffic buffered for the device in the sleep state on a respective link [Seok; abstract; fig 2 and 4; para 0012-0013, 0027, 0030, and 0089]. The Chu and Seok references are analogous art, since they have similar problem solving area in being able to support a tunneled direct link setup (TDLS) in a WLAN system. It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filling date of the claimed invention, to combine the teaching of more specific data within the PTI, taught by Seok, into the system, taught by Chu. The motivation for doing so would have been to have multiple element identifications within one element (PTI), in order to reduce data being transferred. The combination of Chu-Seok does not specifically disclose the “PTI information element comprises: a basic service set identifier or link identification corresponding to each link of the at least one link”. However, in the same field of endeavor, the Li reference discloses the PTI information element comprises: a basic service set identifier or link identification corresponding to each link of the at least one link [Li; Table 1; para 0008-0009]. The Chu-Seok and Li references are analogous art, since they have similar problem solving area in being able to manage device to device transmission. It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filling date of the claimed invention, to combine the teaching of BSSID, taught by Li, into the system, taught by Chu-Seok. The motivation for doing so would have been to have indicating which TDLS link. Regarding claim 15, the apparatus of claim 15 performs the similar steps as the method of claims 1 and 5. The Chu reference teaches the method of claim 2, as referenced above. The additional limitations of an “electronic device”, a “memory”, and a “processor” are rejected with the citation of paragraphs 0043 and 0086 of Chu. Therefore, claims 13 and 18 are rejected using the same art and rationale set forth above in the rejection of claim 15, by the teachings of Chu-Seok-Li. Claims 3, 4, 8, 9, 16, 17, 20, and 21 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chu in view of Li et al. (“LI”) [PGPUB 2016/0100443]. Regarding claim 3, the Chu reference further discloses the identification information comprises a TDLS Peer U-APSD (TPU) information element [Chu; para 0078] but does not specifically disclose “the TPU information element comprises: a basic service set identifier or link identification corresponding to each link of the at least one link, and TPU buffer status information, and the TPU buffer status information indicates buffer statuses for traffics of different access categories on a respective link”. However, in the same field of endeavor, the Li reference discloses the TPU information element comprises: a basic service set identifier or link identification corresponding to each link of the at least one link, and TPU buffer status information, and the TPU buffer status information indicates buffer statuses for traffics of different access categories on a respective link [Li; Table 1; para 0008-0009]. The Chu and Li references are analogous art, since they have similar problem solving area in being able to manage device to device transmission. It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filling date of the claimed invention, to combine the teaching of TPU buffer status, taught by Li, into the system, taught by Chu. The motivation for doing so would have been to have been to have the receiving device know the status of buffering. Regarding claim 4, the combination of Chu-Li further discloses each basic service set identifier indicates an identifier of a basic service set to which an access point on a respective link belongs [Chu; para 0062] [Li; Table 1; para 0003 and 0008-0009]. Regarding claim 8, the Chu reference further discloses the identification information comprises a TDLS Peer U-APSD (TPU) information element [Chu; para 0078] but does not specifically disclose “the TPU information element comprises: a basic service set identifier or link identification corresponding to each link of the at least one link, and TPU buffer status information, and the TPU buffer status information indicates buffer statuses for traffics of different access categories on a respective link”. However, in the same field of endeavor, the Li reference discloses the TPU information element comprises: a basic service set identifier or link identification corresponding to each link of the at least one link, and TPU buffer status information, and the TPU buffer status information indicates buffer statuses for traffics of different access categories on a respective link [Li; Table 1; para 0008-0009]. The Chu and Li references are analogous art, since they have similar problem solving area in being able to manage device to device transmission. It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filling date of the claimed invention, to combine the teaching of TPU buffer status, taught by Li, into the system, taught by Chu. The motivation for doing so would have been to have been to have the receiving device know the status of buffering. Regarding claim 9, the combination of Chu-Li further discloses each basic service set identifier indicates an identifier of a basic service set to which an access point on a respective link belongs [Chu; para 0062] [Li; Table 1; para 0003 and 0008-0009]. Regarding claim 16, the Chu reference further discloses the identification information comprises a TDLS Peer U-APSD (TPU) information element [Chu; para 0078] but does not specifically disclose “the TPU information element comprises: a basic service set identifier or link identification corresponding to each link of the at least one link, and TPU buffer status information, and the TPU buffer status information indicates buffer statuses for traffics of different access categories on a respective link”. However, in the same field of endeavor, the Li reference discloses the TPU information element comprises: a basic service set identifier or link identification corresponding to each link of the at least one link, and TPU buffer status information, and the TPU buffer status information indicates buffer statuses for traffics of different access categories on a respective link [Li; Table 1; para 0008-0009]. The Chu and Li references are analogous art, since they have similar problem solving area in being able to manage device to device transmission. It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filling date of the claimed invention, to combine the teaching of TPU buffer status, taught by Li, into the system, taught by Chu. The motivation for doing so would have been to have been to have the receiving device know the status of buffering. Regarding claim 17, the combination of Chu-Li further discloses each basic service set identifier indicates an identifier of a basic service set to which an access point on a respective link belongs [Chu; para 0062] [Li; Table 1; para 0003 and 0008-0009]. Regarding claim 20, the Chu reference further discloses the identification information comprises a TDLS Peer U-APSD (TPU) information element [Chu; para 0078] but does not specifically disclose “the TPU information element comprises: a basic service set identifier or link identification corresponding to each link of the at least one link, and TPU buffer status information, and the TPU buffer status information indicates buffer statuses for traffics of different access categories on a respective link”. However, in the same field of endeavor, the Li reference discloses the TPU information element comprises: a basic service set identifier or link identification corresponding to each link of the at least one link, and TPU buffer status information, and the TPU buffer status information indicates buffer statuses for traffics of different access categories on a respective link [Li; Table 1; para 0008-0009]. The Chu and Li references are analogous art, since they have similar problem solving area in being able to manage device to device transmission. It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filling date of the claimed invention, to combine the teaching of TPU buffer status, taught by Li, into the system, taught by Chu. The motivation for doing so would have been to have been to have the receiving device know the status of buffering. Regarding claim 21, the Chu reference further discloses the identification information comprises a TDLS Peer U-APSD (TPU) information element [Chu; para 0078] but does not specifically disclose “the TPU information element comprises: a basic service set identifier or link identification corresponding to each link of the at least one link, and TPU buffer status information, and the TPU buffer status information indicates buffer statuses for traffics of different access categories on a respective link”. However, in the same field of endeavor, the Li reference discloses the TPU information element comprises: a basic service set identifier or link identification corresponding to each link of the at least one link, and TPU buffer status information, and the TPU buffer status information indicates buffer statuses for traffics of different access categories on a respective link [Li; Table 1; para 0008-0009]. The Chu and Li references are analogous art, since they have similar problem solving area in being able to manage device to device transmission. It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filling date of the claimed invention, to combine the teaching of TPU buffer status, taught by Li, into the system, taught by Chu. The motivation for doing so would have been to have been to have the receiving device know the status of buffering. Conclusion The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Dwivedi et al. [PGPUB 2012/0051240] describes TDLS with buffering data for a wireless station that is in sleep state. Huang et al. [PGPUB 2025/0317997] describes setting up Tunneled direct link setup (TDLS). Fischer et al. [USPAT 12,526,755] describes synchronous multi-link devices (SMLD). Grandhi et al. [PGPUB 2011/0069689] describes peer-to-peer communication frames with TDLS. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JASON D CARDONE whose telephone number is (571)272-3933. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri. 8am-4pmEST. 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, Umar Cheema can be reached at 571-270-3037. 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. /JASON D CARDONE/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2458
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Jan 26, 2024
Application Filed
Feb 04, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §102, §103 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12603696
WIRELESS COMMUNICATION TECHNIQUE OF REDUCING INFLUENCE OF AN INTERFERENCE SIGNAL ON A RADIO SIGNAL
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12587864
METHODS AND DEVICES FOR OPERATING VEHICLES USING DECENTRALIZED COMMUNICATION
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12580834
CONVEYOR CONTROLLER WITH SIDEBAND COMMUNICATION SYSTEM
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 17, 2026
Patent 12574302
CONTROL OF CLOSED NETWORK USING NETWORK SLICE
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 10, 2026
Patent 12574822
METHOD FOR DETERMINING MEC ACCESS POINT AND APPARATUS
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 10, 2026
Study what changed to get past this examiner. Based on 5 most recent grants.

AI Strategy Recommendation

Get an AI-powered prosecution strategy using examiner precedents, rejection analysis, and claim mapping.
Powered by AI — typically takes 5-10 seconds

Prosecution Projections

1-2
Expected OA Rounds
90%
Grant Probability
67%
With Interview (-23.1%)
2y 3m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 31 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allow rate.

Sign in with your work email

Enter your email to receive a magic link. No password needed.

Personal email addresses (Gmail, Yahoo, etc.) are not accepted.

Free tier: 3 strategy analyses per month