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 . Claims 1-20 are pending.
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.
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, 11-13, 17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Baek et al. (US# 2025/0193789 hereinafter referred to as Baek) in view of Shafin et al. (US# 2023/0021113 hereinafter referred to as Shafin).
RE Claim 1¸ Baek discloses an electronic device for facilitating wireless communication (See Baek FIG 1), comprising processing circuitry configured to cause:
performing a restricted target wake time (TWT) setup with an access point to specify a restricted TWT service period (See Baek [0196], [0253] – performing R-TWT setup with AP; AP announces R-TWT SP (service period)) for delivery of latency sensitive traffic (See Baek [0196], [0253] – for low latency traffic) and specify first latency sensitive traffic status information in a downlink direction and second latency sensitive traffic status information in an uplink direction (See Baek FIG 14; [0196], [0198], [0253] – exchange awake/doze status; TWT request/response frame has status information (i.e. for both downlink and uplink));
receiving a frame from the access point during the restricted TWT service period, wherein the frame includes information for updating the first latency sensitive traffic status information in the downlink (See Baek [0198] – an AP which had already confirmed a status of STA may transmit DL MU PPDU to wake STAs; trigger frame may inform STAs that AP has buffered data); and
updating the first latency sensitive traffic status information in the downlink (See Baek [0198] – trigger frame may inform STAs that AP has buffered data).
Baek does not specifically disclose wherein the frame including information for updating the first latency sensitive traffic status information updates whether traffic identifications (TIDs) mapped in the downlink direction are identified as latency sensitive traffic.
However, Shafin teaches of wherein the frame including information for updating the first latency sensitive traffic status information updates whether traffic identifications (TIDs) mapped in the downlink direction are identified as latency sensitive traffic (See Shafin FIGs 17, 19; [0131] - According to some embodiments, the DL TID Bitmap Valid subfield indicates if the Restricted TWT DL TID Bitmap field has valid information. When the value is set to 0, it indicates that DL traffic of all TIDs is identified as latency-sensitive traffic, and the Restricted TWT DL TID Bitmap field is reserved. The UL TID Bitmap Valid subfield indicates if the Restricted TWT UL TID Bitmap field has valid information).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to implement the restricted target wake time system, as disclosed in Baek, wherein the frame including information for updating the first latency sensitive traffic status information updates whether traffic identifications (TIDs) mapped in the downlink direction are identified as latency sensitive traffic, as taught in Shafin. One is motivated as such in order to help facilitate communication of latency sensitive traffic while performing power saving measures (See Shafin Background; Summary).
RE Claim 11¸ Baek, modified by Shafin, discloses an electronic device, as set forth in claim 1 above, wherein the first latency sensitive traffic status information in the downlink includes a first bitmap including a plurality of bits, each of the plurality of bits in the first bitmap is associated with a respective one of traffic identifiers (See Baek [0201], [0233] – using bitmap to identify traffic channels (DL and UL)).
Baek does not specifically disclose the bitmap indicating whether an associated traffic identifier is classified as latency sensitive traffic stream.
However, Shafin teaches of the bitmap indicating whether an associated traffic identifier is classified as latency sensitive traffic stream (See Shafin FIGs 17, 19; [0131] - According to some embodiments, the DL TID Bitmap Valid subfield indicates if the Restricted TWT DL TID Bitmap field has valid information. When the value is set to 0, it indicates that DL traffic of all TIDs is identified as latency-sensitive traffic, and the Restricted TWT DL TID Bitmap field is reserved. The UL TID Bitmap Valid subfield indicates if the Restricted TWT UL TID Bitmap field has valid information).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to implement the restricted target wake time system, as disclosed in Baek, comprising the bitmap indicating whether an associated traffic identifier is classified as latency sensitive traffic stream, as taught in Shafin. One is motivated as such in order to improve the performance of latency sensitive traffic communication (See Shafin Background; Summary).
RE Claim 12, Baek, modified by Shafin, discloses an electronic device, as set forth in claim 1 above, wherein the frame further includes an identifier field indicating a TWT service period related to the first latency sensitive traffic status information (See Baek [0009], [0196] – sharing information about TWT SP).
RE Claim 13¸ Baek discloses a method performed by processing circuitry of an electronic device for facilitating wireless communication (See Baek FIG 1), comprising:
performing a restricted target wake time (TWT) setup with an access point to specify a restricted TWT service period (See Baek [0196], [0253] – performing R-TWT setup with AP; AP announces R-TWT SP (service period)) for delivery of latency sensitive traffic (See Baek [0196], [0253] – for low latency traffic) and specify first latency sensitive traffic status information in a downlink direction and second latency sensitive traffic status information in an uplink direction (See Baek FIG 14; [0196], [0198], [0253] – exchange awake/doze status; TWT request/response frame has status information (i.e. for both downlink and uplink));
receiving a frame from the access point during the restricted TWT service period, wherein the frame includes information for updating the first latency sensitive traffic status information in the downlink (See Baek [0198] – an AP which had already confirmed a status of STA may transmit DL MU PPDU to wake STAs; trigger frame may inform STAs that AP has buffered data); and
updating the first latency sensitive traffic status information in the downlink (See Baek [0198] – trigger frame may inform STAs that AP has buffered data).
Baek does not specifically disclose wherein the frame including information for updating the first latency sensitive traffic status information updates whether traffic identifications (TIDs) mapped in the downlink direction are identified as latency sensitive traffic.
However, Shafin teaches of wherein the frame including information for updating the first latency sensitive traffic status information updates whether traffic identifications (TIDs) mapped in the downlink direction are identified as latency sensitive traffic (See Shafin FIGs 17, 19; [0131] - According to some embodiments, the DL TID Bitmap Valid subfield indicates if the Restricted TWT DL TID Bitmap field has valid information. When the value is set to 0, it indicates that DL traffic of all TIDs is identified as latency-sensitive traffic, and the Restricted TWT DL TID Bitmap field is reserved. The UL TID Bitmap Valid subfield indicates if the Restricted TWT UL TID Bitmap field has valid information).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to implement the restricted target wake time system, as disclosed in Baek, wherein the frame including information for updating the first latency sensitive traffic status information updates whether traffic identifications (TIDs) mapped in the downlink direction are identified as latency sensitive traffic, as taught in Shafin. One is motivated as such in order to help facilitate communication of latency sensitive traffic while performing power saving measures (See Shafin Background; Summary).
RE Claim 17¸ Baek discloses an electronic device for facilitating wireless communication (See Baek FIG 1), comprising processing circuitry configured to cause:
performing a restricted target wake time (TWT) setup with a station to specify a restricted TWT service period (See Baek [0196], [0253] – STA performing R-TWT setup with AP; AP announces R-TWT SP (service period)) for delivery of latency sensitive traffic (See Baek [0196], [0253] – for low latency traffic) and specify first latency sensitive traffic status information in a downlink direction and second latency sensitive traffic status information in an uplink direction (See Baek FIG 14; [0196], [0198], [0253] – exchange awake/doze status; TWT request/response frame has status information (i.e. for both downlink and uplink));
generating a frame including information for updating the first latency sensitive traffic status information in the downlink (See Baek [0198] – an AP which had already confirmed a status of STA may transmit DL MU PPDU to wake STAs; trigger frame may inform STAs that AP has buffered data); and
transmitting the frame to the station during the restricted TWT service period (See Baek [0198] – trigger frame may inform STAs that AP has buffered data).
Baek does not specifically disclose wherein the frame including information for updating the first latency sensitive traffic status information updates whether traffic identifications (TIDs) mapped in the downlink direction are identified as latency sensitive traffic.
However, Shafin teaches of wherein the frame including information for updating the first latency sensitive traffic status information updates whether traffic identifications (TIDs) mapped in the downlink direction are identified as latency sensitive traffic (See Shafin FIGs 17, 19; [0131] - According to some embodiments, the DL TID Bitmap Valid subfield indicates if the Restricted TWT DL TID Bitmap field has valid information. When the value is set to 0, it indicates that DL traffic of all TIDs is identified as latency-sensitive traffic, and the Restricted TWT DL TID Bitmap field is reserved. The UL TID Bitmap Valid subfield indicates if the Restricted TWT UL TID Bitmap field has valid information).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to implement the restricted target wake time system, as disclosed in Baek, wherein the frame including information for updating the first latency sensitive traffic status information updates whether traffic identifications (TIDs) mapped in the downlink direction are identified as latency sensitive traffic, as taught in Shafin. One is motivated as such in order to help facilitate communication of latency sensitive traffic while performing power saving measures (See Shafin Background; Summary).
Claims 2-4, 6-9, 14-16, 18-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Baek et al. (US# 2025/0193789 hereinafter referred to as Baek) in view of Shafin et al. (US# 2023/0021113 hereinafter referred to as Shafin) and Xin et al. (US# 2023/0047705 hereinafter referred to as Xin).
RE Claim 2, Baek, modified by Shafin, discloses an electronic device, as set forth in claim 1 above. Baek, modified by Shafin, does not specifically disclose wherein the frame further includes an enable field indicating whether a receiver of the frame sends information for updating the second latency sensitive traffic status information in the uplink direction.
However, Xin teaches of wherein the frame further includes an enable field indicating whether a receiver of the frame sends information for updating the second latency sensitive traffic status information in the uplink direction (See Xin [0253], [0295] - AP1 sends BSRP to STA1 to request buffer status using PPDU).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to implement the restricted target wake time system, as disclosed in Baek, modified by Shafin, wherein the frame further includes an enable field indicating whether a receiver of the frame sends information for updating the second latency sensitive traffic status information in the uplink direction, as taught in Xin. One is motivated as such in order to improve efficiency and fair use (See Xin Background; Summary).
RE Claim 3¸ Baek, modified by Shafin and Xin, discloses an electronic device, as set forth in claim 2 above, wherein the processing circuitry is further configured to cause:
checking the enable field (See Xin [0253], [0295] - AP1 sends BSRP to STA1 to request buffer status using PPDU); and
when the enable field indicates that a receiver of the frame sends information for updating the second latency sensitive traffic status information in the uplink direction (See Xin [0253], [0295] – when STA1 requested to transmit buffer status using PPDU), transmitting, in response to the frame, a physical layer (PHY) protocol data unit (PPDU) (See Baek [0198] – STA sends PPDU frame to update status) including information for updating the second latency sensitive traffic status information in the uplink direction (See Baek [0106], [0113] – transmission/reception is done using PPDU frame), wherein the PPDU includes no data field (See Baek [0113], [0198] – uses Null frame to indicate status; NDP doesn’t include data field).
RE Claim 4¸ Baek, modified by Xin, discloses an electronic device, as set forth in claim 3 above, wherein the PPDU includes a PHY preamble (See Baek [0105] – PDDU including PHY preamble) including a first short training field (STF) (See Baek [0107] – STF) corresponding to a non-high-throughput (Non-HT) short training field (L-STF) (See Baek [0115]), a first long training field (LTF) corresponding to a Non-HT long training field (L-LTF) (See Baek [0115]), a first signal field corresponding to a Non-HT signal (L-SIG) field (See Baek [0115]), a second signal field corresponding to a repeated Non-HT signal (RL-SIG) field (See Baek [0118]), and a third signal field corresponding to a universal signal (U-SIG) field (See Baek [0157], [0162]).
RE Claim 6¸ Baek, modified by Shafin and Xin, discloses an electronic device, as set forth in claim 4 above, wherein the frame further includes a resource unit which is used for the electronic device to transmit the PPDU, the PPDU is transmitted through the resource unit (See Baek [0120], [0130] – RUs for PPDU).
RE Claim 7¸ Baek, modified by Shafin and Xin, discloses an electronic device, as set forth in claim 4 above, wherein the PPDU further includes a fourth signal field following the third signal field, the fourth signal field includes data (See Baek FIG 18; [0233] – i.e. TWT channel subfield).
RE Claim 8¸ Baek, modified by Shafin and Xin, discloses an electronic device, as set forth in claim 4 above, wherein the data in the fourth signal field is under a TWT agreement established before updating the first latency sensitive traffic status information and the second latency sensitive traffic status information (See Baek FIG 18; [0233] – i.e. TWT channel subfield representing allowed channels).
RE Claim 9¸ Baek, modified by Shafin and Xin, discloses an electronic device, as set forth in claim 8 above, wherein the information for updating the second latency sensitive traffic status information in the uplink includes a second bitmap including a plurality of bits, each of the plurality of bits in the second bitmap is associated with a respective one of traffic identifiers (See Baek [0201], [0233] – using bitmap to identify traffic channels (DL and UL)).
Baek does not specifically disclose the bitmap indicating whether an associated traffic identifier is classified as latency sensitive traffic stream.
However, Shafin teaches of the bitmap indicating whether an associated traffic identifier is classified as latency sensitive traffic stream (See Shafin FIGs 17, 19; [0131] - According to some embodiments, the DL TID Bitmap Valid subfield indicates if the Restricted TWT DL TID Bitmap field has valid information. When the value is set to 0, it indicates that DL traffic of all TIDs is identified as latency-sensitive traffic, and the Restricted TWT DL TID Bitmap field is reserved. The UL TID Bitmap Valid subfield indicates if the Restricted TWT UL TID Bitmap field has valid information).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to implement the restricted target wake time system, as disclosed in Baek, comprising the bitmap indicating whether an associated traffic identifier is classified as latency sensitive traffic stream, as taught in Shafin. One is motivated as such in order to improve the performance of latency sensitive traffic communication (See Shafin Background; Summary).
RE Claim 14, Baek, modified by Shafin, discloses a method, as set forth in claim 13 above. Baek, modified by Shafin, does not specifically disclose wherein the frame further includes an enable field indicating whether a receiver of the frame sends information for updating the second latency sensitive traffic status information in the uplink direction.
However, Xin teaches of wherein the frame further includes an enable field indicating whether a receiver of the frame sends information for updating the second latency sensitive traffic status information in the uplink direction (See Xin [0253], [0295] - AP1 sends BSRP to STA1 to request buffer status using PPDU).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to implement the restricted target wake time system, as disclosed in Baek, modified by Shafin, wherein the frame further includes an enable field indicating whether a receiver of the frame sends information for updating the second latency sensitive traffic status information in the uplink direction, as taught in Xin. One is motivated as such in order to improve efficiency and fair use (See Xin Background; Summary).
RE Claim 15¸ Baek, modified by Shafin and Xin, discloses a method, as set forth in claim 14 above, wherein the processing circuitry is further configured to cause:
checking the enable field (See Xin [0253], [0295] - AP1 sends BSRP to STA1 to request buffer status using PPDU); and
when the enable field indicates that a receiver of the frame sends information for updating the second latency sensitive traffic status information in the uplink direction (See Xin [0253], [0295] – when STA1 requested to transmit buffer status using PPDU), transmitting, in response to the frame, a physical layer (PHY) protocol data unit (PPDU) (See Baek [0198] – STA sends PPDU frame to update status) including information for updating the second latency sensitive traffic status information in the uplink direction (See Baek [0106], [0113] – transmission/reception is done using PPDU frame), wherein the PPDU includes no data field (See Baek [0113], [0198] – uses Null frame to indicate status; NDP doesn’t include data field).
RE Claim 16¸ Baek, modified by Xin, discloses a method, as set forth in claim 15 above, wherein the PPDU includes a PHY preamble (See Baek [0105] – PDDU including PHY preamble) including a first short training field (STF) (See Baek [0107] – STF) corresponding to a non-high-throughput (Non-HT) short training field (L-STF) (See Baek [0115]), a first long training field (LTF) corresponding to a Non-HT long training field (L-LTF) (See Baek [0115]), a first signal field corresponding to a Non-HT signal (L-SIG) field (See Baek [0115]), a second signal field corresponding to a repeated Non-HT signal (RL-SIG) field (See Baek [0118]), and a third signal field corresponding to a universal signal (U-SIG) field (See Baek [0157], [0162]).
RE Claim 18, Baek, modified by Shafin, discloses an electronic device, as set forth in claim 17 above. Baek, modified by Shafin, does not specifically disclose wherein the frame further includes an enable field indicating whether a receiver of the frame sends information for updating the second latency sensitive traffic status information in the uplink direction.
However, Xin teaches of wherein the frame further includes an enable field indicating whether a receiver of the frame sends information for updating the second latency sensitive traffic status information in the uplink direction (See Xin [0253], [0295] - AP1 sends BSRP to STA1 to request buffer status using PPDU).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to implement the restricted target wake time system, as disclosed in Baek, modified by Shafin, wherein the frame further includes an enable field indicating whether a receiver of the frame sends information for updating the second latency sensitive traffic status information in the uplink direction, as taught in Xin. One is motivated as such in order to improve efficiency and fair use (See Xin Background; Summary).
RE Claim 19¸ Baek, modified by Shafin and Xin, discloses an electronic device, as set forth in claim 18 above, wherein the processing circuitry is further configured to cause:
when the enable field indicates that a receiver of the frame sends information for updating the second latency sensitive traffic status information in the uplink direction (See Xin [0253], [0295] – when STA1 requested to transmit buffer status using PPDU), receiving, in response to the frame, a physical layer (PHY) protocol data unit (PPDU) (See Baek [0198] – STA sends PPDU frame to update status) including information for updating the second latency sensitive traffic status information in the uplink direction (See Baek [0106], [0113] – transmission/reception is done using PPDU frame), wherein the PPDU includes no data field (See Baek [0113], [0198] – uses Null frame to indicate status; NDP doesn’t include data field).
RE Claim 20¸ Baek, modified by Shafin and Xin, discloses an electronic device, as set forth in claim 19 above, wherein the PPDU includes a PHY preamble (See Baek [0105] – PDDU including PHY preamble) including a first short training field (STF) (See Baek [0107] – STF) corresponding to a non-high-throughput (Non-HT) short training field (L-STF) (See Baek [0115]), a first long training field (LTF) corresponding to a Non-HT long training field (L-LTF) (See Baek [0115]), a first signal field corresponding to a Non-HT signal (L-SIG) field (See Baek [0115]), a second signal field corresponding to a repeated Non-HT signal (RL-SIG) field (See Baek [0118]), and a third signal field corresponding to a universal signal (U-SIG) field (See Baek [0157], [0162]).
Claim 5 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Baek et al. (US# 2025/0193789 hereinafter referred to as Baek) in view of Shafin et al. (US# 2023/0021113 hereinafter referred to as Shafin), Xin et al. (US# 2023/0047705 hereinafter referred to as Xin) and Hu et al. (US# 2022/0345937 hereinafter referred to as Hu).
RE Claim 5¸ Baek, modified by Shafin and Xin, discloses an electronic device, as set forth in claim 4 above. Baek, modified by Shafin and Xin, does not specifically disclose wherein the information for updating the second latency sensitive traffic status information in the uplink direction is included in the third signal field.
However, Hu teaches of wherein the information for updating the second latency sensitive traffic status information in the uplink direction is included in the third signal field (See Hu Abstract; Claim 1 – U-SIG field comprises mode indication and preamble puncturing status indication).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to implement the restricted target wake time system, as disclosed in Baek, modified by Shafin and Xin, wherein the information for updating the second latency sensitive traffic status information in the uplink direction is included in the third signal field, as taught in Hu. One is motivated as such in order to help reduce signaling overhead (See Hu Background; Summary).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 10 is objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Ajami et al. (US# 2023/0140312 – which teaches of indicating whether latency-sensitive communications within the r-TWT SP are trigger-based and a TID bitmap indicating TIDs supported by the r-TWT SP).
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 Steve R Young whose telephone number is (571)270-7518. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9am-5pm.
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, Chirag G Shah can be reached at (571) 272-3144. 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.
/STEVE R YOUNG/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2477
