DETAILED ACTION
Response to Amendment
In response to pre-appeal conference filed on 7/30/2026, claims 1- 20 are pending for examinations.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments, filed on 7/20/2026, with respect to the rejection(s) of claim(s) have been fully considered and are persuasive. Therefore, the rejection has been withdrawn. However, upon further consideration, a new ground(s) of rejection is made in view of Lu (US Pub. No. 2024/0251443 A1) and Xin et al. (US Pub. No. 2023/0047705 A1).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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.
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.
Claim(s) 1- 2, 4- 5- 7, 9, 11, 13, 15, 17- 18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lu (US Pub. No. 2024/0251443 A1) in view of Xin et al. (US Pub. No. 2023/0047705 A1).
Regarding claim 1, Lu teaches a method (see Fig. 8- 9) comprising:
sending, by an access point (AP) to a station (STA), a first frame (see [0071- 0072] AP and r-TWT scheduled STA negotiate/determine parameters through a TWT Request and/or TWT Response frame during r-TWT membership setup; further see [0073- 0086 and #310 of Fig. 8]; now refer to #410 of Fig. 9 about AP sends a management frame to the STA) indicating a trigger-enabled (TE) restricted target wake time (r-TWT) service period (SP) (in context with [0053- 0054] pls refer to [0055] A restricted TWT (r-TWT) is based on the broadcast TWT. In a broadcast TWT operation, the TWT scheduling AP carries a broadcast TWT element in a beacon frame of broadcast to indicate a broadcast TWT service period (broadcast TWT SP). In the trigger-enable service period, after obtaining a channel access opportunity, the AP transmits the trigger frame or a downlink buffer unit (BU) to the TWT scheduled station (TWT scheduled STA); further the r-TWT membership setup uses TWT Request/Response frames carrying r-TWT EDCA parameter information; see [0070]–[0086]) for the AP and the STA (The AP is the scheduling AP associated with the r-TWT scheduled STA; see [0070]–[0074]; further see [0093], Fig. 8 and 9 #310, 410);
here Lu provides as per [0054].. , in a trigger-enable broadcast TWT, the TWT scheduled station cannot transmit frames that do not carry an HE trigger-based physical layer protocol data unit (PPDU) (HE TB PPDU) to the TWT scheduling AP; further see [0165- 0166] In some embodiments, in response to the role of the Non-AP STA being the r-TWT scheduled station, the type of the r-TWT service period being the trigger-enable service period, and the r-TWT scheduled station being not allowed to perform channel access based on the EDCA rule in the r-TWT service period, in this case, the block 310 may specifically include: the Non-AP STA stops the backoff process in the r-TWT service period, and the Non-AP STA sends a trigger-based physical layer protocol data unit (PPDU) according to indication information of a trigger frame, when the Non-AP STA receives the trigger frame sent by the AP associated with the Non-AP STA.; see [0165]…. the scheduled Non-AP STA is not allowed to perform the EDCA rule for channel access in the r-TWT service period (SP) (for example, which is a trigger-enable r-TWT service period), for the r-TWT scheduled station, the r-TWT scheduled station stops performing the EDCA rule for channel access. That is, the EDCA backoff process is stopped. At the same time, when receiving the trigger frame from an r-TWT scheduling AP, the trigger-based PPDU (TB PPDU) is sent based on the indication information of the trigger frame..
but Lu is silent about
receiving, by the AP from the STA, a non-trigger-based frame during the TE r-TWT SP; and
sending, by the AP to the STA, a second frame for suspending contention-based channel access by the STA during the TE r-TWT SP.
Xin teaches imitations, “receiving, by the AP from the STA, a non-trigger-based frame during the TE r-TWT SP”; see in [0173] under section 4.5 “termination of R-TWT SP” regarding if a R-TWT scheduled STA is to obtain a TXOP that overlaps the R-TWTx SP, it is forced to use (MU)RTS/CTS exchange to obtain that TXOP. The R-TWT scheduling AP may not respond to a CTS when it receives such RTS from a R-TWT scheduled STA which does not allow that R-TWT scheduled STA to obtain the TXOP. In at least one embodiment/mode/case the R-TWT scheduling AP sets an arbitrary NAV in the CTS frame in response to such an RTS from the R-TWT scheduled STA. The R-TWT scheduled STA then only obtains the TXOP that equals the NAV in the CTS frame.
Further Xin teaches limitations, “sending, by the AP to the STA, a second frame for suspending contention-based channel access by the STA during the TE r-TWT SP”; see [0213].. The R-TWT scheduling AP may not respond with a CTS when it receives such an RTS from a R-TWT scheduled STA, and does not allow that R-TWT scheduled STA to obtain the TXOP. It is also possible that the R-TWT scheduling AP sets an arbitrary NAV in the CTS frame in response to such a RTS from a R-TWT scheduled STA. The R-TWT scheduled STA then only obtains the TXOP that equals the NAV in the CTS frame.
It would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill, in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention was made to consider the teachings of Xin with the teachings of Lu to make system more effective. Having a mechanism wherein receiving, by the AP from the STA, a non-trigger-based frame during the TE r-TWT SP; and sending, by the AP to the STA, a second frame for suspending contention-based channel access by the STA during the TE r-TWT SP; greater way resources can be managed/utilized in the communication system.
Regarding claim 2, Lu in view of Xin teaches as per claim 1, wherein the non-trigger-based frame comprises at least one of latency-sensitive data or high priority data; Xin see [0006].. real time application requires low latency communication and uses best effort communication. The data generated from the RTA is called RTA traffic and will be packetized as RTA frames at the transmitter STA…now see [0214].. the R-TWT scheduling AP and the R-TWTx member STAs use EDCA to obtain the TXOP for the transmission of the scheduled traffic streams of R-TWTx during R-TWTx SP. When an EDCA TXOP is obtained, in some cases all the frames of the scheduled traffic streams of R-TWTx, including those from the primary AC and non-primary AC, can be transmitted during that EDCA TXOP. It should be noted that the primary AC represents the AC of which the EDCAF obtains the TXOP. In at least one embodiment/mode/case only the EDCAFs of the ACs which have scheduled traffic streams of R-TWTx in their buffer are allowed to contend for the channel.
Regarding claim 4, Lu in view of Xin teaches as per claim 1, wherein the second frame comprises at least one of:
a data frame,
a control frame,
a management frame,
an action frame, or
a trigger frame; Lu [0165] In some embodiments, in response to the role of the Non-AP STA being the r-TWT scheduled station, the type of the r-TWT service period being the trigger-enable service period, and the r-TWT scheduled station being not allowed to perform channel access based on the EDCA rule in the r-TWT service period, in this case, the block 310 may specifically include: the Non-AP STA stops the backoff process in the r-TWT service period, and the Non-AP STA sends a trigger-based physical layer protocol data unit (PPDU) according to indication information of a trigger frame (i.e. second frame), when the Non-AP STA receives the trigger frame sent by the AP associated with the Non-AP STA.
Xin see [0213].. The R-TWT scheduling AP may not respond with a CTS when it receives such an RTS from a R-TWT scheduled STA, and does not allow that R-TWT scheduled STA to obtain the TXOP. It is also possible that the R-TWT scheduling AP sets an arbitrary NAV in the CTS frame (i.e. control frame) in response to such a RTS from a R-TWT scheduled STA. The R-TWT scheduled STA then only obtains the TXOP that equals the NAV in the CTS frame.
Regarding claim 5, Lu in view of Xin teaches as per claim 1, wherein the second frame is configured to cause the STA to send traffic associated with the TE r-TWT during the TE r-TWT SP; Lu [0165] In some embodiments, in response to the role of the Non-AP STA being the r-TWT scheduled station, the type of the r-TWT service period being the trigger-enable service period, and the r-TWT scheduled station being not allowed to perform channel access based on the EDCA rule in the r-TWT service period, in this case, the block 310 may specifically include: the Non-AP STA stops the backoff process in the r-TWT service period, and the Non-AP STA sends a trigger-based physical layer protocol data unit (PPDU) according to indication information of a trigger frame (i.e. second frame), when the Non-AP STA receives the trigger frame sent by the AP associated with the Non-AP STA.
Regarding claim 6, Lu in view of Xin teaches as per claim 1, wherein the second frame indicates an extension of a duration of the TE r-TWT SP; Xin see [0335] This example also shows a possibility that a R-TWT SP can be extended if all the frames of the scheduled traffic streams of that R-TWT cannot be transmitted before the scheduled end time of the R-TWT SP. For example, as shown in the figure, the R-TWT1 SP ends later than its scheduled end time. The R-TWT SP can be extended by the TXOP holder to extend the current TXOP. For example, as shown in the figure, the last trigger frame transmitted by AP1 can extend the TXOP.
Regarding claim 7, Lu in view of Xin teaches as per claim 1, wherein the second frame comprises an indication to suspend contention-based channel access by the STA during the TE r-TWT SP; Xin see [0213].. The R-TWT scheduling AP may not respond with a CTS when it receives such an RTS from a R-TWT scheduled STA, and does not allow that R-TWT scheduled STA to obtain the TXOP. It is also possible that the R-TWT scheduling AP sets an arbitrary NAV in the CTS frame in response to such a RTS from a R-TWT scheduled STA. The R-TWT scheduled STA then only obtains the TXOP that equals the NAV in the CTS frame.
Regarding claim 9, Lu in view of Xin teaches as per claim 1, wherein the second frame is an immediate response frame; Xin see in [0173] under section 4.5 “termination of R-TWT SP” regarding if a R-TWT scheduled STA is to obtain a TXOP that overlaps the R-TWTx SP, it is forced to use (MU)RTS/CTS exchange to obtain that TXOP. The R-TWT scheduling AP may not respond to a CTS when it receives such RTS from a R-TWT scheduled STA which does not allow that R-TWT scheduled STA to obtain the TXOP. In at least one embodiment/mode/case the R-TWT scheduling AP sets an arbitrary NAV in the CTS frame in response to such an RTS from the R-TWT scheduled STA. The R-TWT scheduled STA then only obtains the TXOP that equals the NAV in the CTS frame.
Regarding claim 10, Lu in view of Xin teaches as per claim 1, wherein the receiving the non-trigger-based frame comprises receiving the non-trigger-based frame via contention-based channel access; Xin see in [0173] under section 4.5 “termination of R-TWT SP” regarding if a R-TWT scheduled STA is to obtain a TXOP that overlaps the R-TWTx SP, it is forced to use (MU)RTS/CTS exchange to obtain that TXOP. The R-TWT scheduling AP may not respond to a CTS when it receives such RTS from a R-TWT scheduled STA which does not allow that R-TWT scheduled STA to obtain the TXOP. In at least one embodiment/mode/case the R-TWT scheduling AP sets an arbitrary NAV in the CTS frame in response to such an RTS from the R-TWT scheduled STA. The R-TWT scheduled STA then only obtains the TXOP that equals the NAV in the CTS frame..
Regarding claim 11, Sony teaches a method comprising:
receiving, by a station (STA) from an access point (AP), a first frame (see [0071- 0072] AP and r-TWT scheduled STA negotiate/determine parameters through a TWT Request and/or TWT Response frame during r-TWT membership setup; further see [0073- 0086 and #310 of Fig. 8]; now refer to #410 of Fig. 9 about AP sends a management frame to the STA) indicating a trigger-enabled (TE) restricted target wake time (r-TWT) service period (SP) (in context with [0053- 0054] pls refer to [0055] A restricted TWT (r-TWT) is based on the broadcast TWT. In a broadcast TWT operation, the TWT scheduling AP carries a broadcast TWT element in a beacon frame of broadcast to indicate a broadcast TWT service period (broadcast TWT SP). In the trigger-enable service period, after obtaining a channel access opportunity, the AP transmits the trigger frame or a downlink buffer unit (BU) to the TWT scheduled station (TWT scheduled STA); further the r-TWT membership setup uses TWT Request/Response frames carrying r-TWT EDCA parameter information; see [0070]–[0086]) for the AP and the STA (The AP is the scheduling AP associated with the r-TWT scheduled STA; see [0070]–[0074]; further see [0093], Fig. 8 and 9 #310, 410);
here Lu provides as per [0054].. , in a trigger-enable broadcast TWT, the TWT scheduled station cannot transmit frames that do not carry an HE trigger-based physical layer protocol data unit (PPDU) (HE TB PPDU) to the TWT scheduling AP; further see [0165- 0166] In some embodiments, in response to the role of the Non-AP STA being the r-TWT scheduled station, the type of the r-TWT service period being the trigger-enable service period, and the r-TWT scheduled station being not allowed to perform channel access based on the EDCA rule in the r-TWT service period, in this case, the block 310 may specifically include: the Non-AP STA stops the backoff process in the r-TWT service period, and the Non-AP STA sends a trigger-based physical layer protocol data unit (PPDU) according to indication information of a trigger frame, when the Non-AP STA receives the trigger frame sent by the AP associated with the Non-AP STA.; see [0165]…. the scheduled Non-AP STA is not allowed to perform the EDCA rule for channel access in the r-TWT service period (SP) (for example, which is a trigger-enable r-TWT service period), for the r-TWT scheduled station, the r-TWT scheduled station stops performing the EDCA rule for channel access. That is, the EDCA backoff process is stopped. At the same time, when receiving the trigger frame from an r-TWT scheduling AP, the trigger-based PPDU (TB PPDU) is sent based on the indication information of the trigger frame..
but Lu is silent about
sending, by the STA to the AP, a non-trigger-based frame during the TE r-TWT SP;
receiving, by the STA from the AP, a second frame during the TE r-TWT SP; and suspending, based on the receiving the second frame contention-based channel access by the STA during the TE r-TWT SP based on the second frame.
Xin teaches imitations, “sending, by the STA to the AP, a non-trigger-based frame during the TE r-TWT SP”; see in [0173] under section 4.5 “termination of R-TWT SP” regarding if a R-TWT scheduled STA is to obtain a TXOP that overlaps the R-TWTx SP, it is forced to use (MU)RTS/CTS exchange to obtain that TXOP. The R-TWT scheduling AP may not respond to a CTS when it receives such RTS from a R-TWT scheduled STA which does not allow that R-TWT scheduled STA to obtain the TXOP. In at least one embodiment/mode/case the R-TWT scheduling AP sets an arbitrary NAV in the CTS frame in response to such an RTS from the R-TWT scheduled STA. The R-TWT scheduled STA then only obtains the TXOP that equals the NAV in the CTS frame.
Further Xin teaches limitations, “receiving, by the STA from the AP, a second frame during the TE r-TWT SP; and suspending, based on the receiving the second frame contention-based channel access by the STA during the TE r-TWT SP based on the second frame”; see [0213].. The R-TWT scheduling AP may not respond with a CTS when it receives such an RTS from a R-TWT scheduled STA, and does not allow that R-TWT scheduled STA to obtain the TXOP. It is also possible that the R-TWT scheduling AP sets an arbitrary NAV in the CTS frame in response to such a RTS from a R-TWT scheduled STA. The R-TWT scheduled STA then only obtains the TXOP that equals the NAV in the CTS frame.
It would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill, in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention was made to consider the teachings of Xin with the teachings of Lu to make system more effective. Having a mechanism sending, by the STA to the AP, a non-trigger-based frame during the TE r-TWT SP; receiving, by the STA from the AP, a second frame during the TE r-TWT SP; and suspending, based on the receiving the second frame contention-based channel access by the STA during the TE r-TWT SP based on the second frame; greater way resources can be managed/utilized in the communication system.
Regarding claim 13, Lu in view of Xin teaches as per claim 11, wherein the sending the non-trigger-based frame comprises sending the non-trigger-based frame via contention-based channel access; Xin see in [0173] under section 4.5 “termination of R-TWT SP” regarding if a R-TWT scheduled STA is to obtain a TXOP that overlaps the R-TWTx SP, it is forced to use (MU)RTS/CTS exchange to obtain that TXOP. The R-TWT scheduling AP may not respond to a CTS when it receives such RTS from a R-TWT scheduled STA which does not allow that R-TWT scheduled STA to obtain the TXOP. In at least one embodiment/mode/case the R-TWT scheduling AP sets an arbitrary NAV in the CTS frame in response to such an RTS from the R-TWT scheduled STA. The R-TWT scheduled STA then only obtains the TXOP that equals the NAV in the CTS frame..
Regarding claim 15, Lu in view of Xin teaches as per claim 1, extending, based on the second frame, a time duration of the TE r-TWT SP; Xin see [0335] This example also shows a possibility that a R-TWT SP can be extended if all the frames of the scheduled traffic streams of that R-TWT cannot be transmitted before the scheduled end time of the R-TWT SP. For example, as shown in the figure, the R-TWT1 SP ends later than its scheduled end time. The R-TWT SP can be extended by the TXOP holder to extend the current TXOP. For example, as shown in the figure, the last trigger frame transmitted by AP1 can extend the TXOP.
Regarding claim 17, Sony teaches a method comprising:
receiving, by a station (STA) from an access point (AP), a first frame (see [0071- 0072] AP and r-TWT scheduled STA negotiate/determine parameters through a TWT Request and/or TWT Response frame during r-TWT membership setup; further see [0073- 0086 and #310 of Fig. 8]; now refer to #410 of Fig. 9 about AP sends a management frame to the STA) indicating a trigger-enabled (TE) restricted target wake time (r-TWT) service period (SP) (in context with [0053- 0054] pls refer to [0055] A restricted TWT (r-TWT) is based on the broadcast TWT. In a broadcast TWT operation, the TWT scheduling AP carries a broadcast TWT element in a beacon frame of broadcast to indicate a broadcast TWT service period (broadcast TWT SP). In the trigger-enable service period, after obtaining a channel access opportunity, the AP transmits the trigger frame or a downlink buffer unit (BU) to the TWT scheduled station (TWT scheduled STA); further the r-TWT membership setup uses TWT Request/Response frames carrying r-TWT EDCA parameter information; see [0070]–[0086]) for the AP and the STA (The AP is the scheduling AP associated with the r-TWT scheduled STA; see [0070]–[0074]; further see [0093], Fig. 8 and 9 #310, 410);
here Lu provides as per [0054].. , in a trigger-enable broadcast TWT, the TWT scheduled station cannot transmit frames that do not carry an HE trigger-based physical layer protocol data unit (PPDU) (HE TB PPDU) to the TWT scheduling AP; further see [0165- 0166] In some embodiments, in response to the role of the Non-AP STA being the r-TWT scheduled station, the type of the r-TWT service period being the trigger-enable service period, and the r-TWT scheduled station being not allowed to perform channel access based on the EDCA rule in the r-TWT service period, in this case, the block 310 may specifically include: the Non-AP STA stops the backoff process in the r-TWT service period, and the Non-AP STA sends a trigger-based physical layer protocol data unit (PPDU) according to indication information of a trigger frame, when the Non-AP STA receives the trigger frame sent by the AP associated with the Non-AP STA.; see [0165]…. the scheduled Non-AP STA is not allowed to perform the EDCA rule for channel access in the r-TWT service period (SP) (for example, which is a trigger-enable r-TWT service period), for the r-TWT scheduled station, the r-TWT scheduled station stops performing the EDCA rule for channel access. That is, the EDCA backoff process is stopped. At the same time, when receiving the trigger frame from an r-TWT scheduling AP, the trigger-based PPDU (TB PPDU) is sent based on the indication information of the trigger frame..
but Lu is silent about
enabling, based on a trigger-frame not being received from the AP during a first time period, contention-based channel access for the STA during the TE r-TWT SP;
receiving, after the first time period from the AP, a second frame; and disabling, based on the receiving the second frame, the contention-based channel access for the STA during the TE r-TWT SP.
Xin teaches imitations, “enabling, based on a trigger-frame not being received from the AP during a first time period, contention-based channel access for the STA during the TE r-TWT SP”; see in [0173] under section 4.5 “termination of R-TWT SP” regarding if a R-TWT scheduled STA is to obtain a TXOP that overlaps the R-TWTx SP, it is forced to use (MU)RTS/CTS exchange to obtain that TXOP. The R-TWT scheduling AP may not respond to a CTS when it receives such RTS from a R-TWT scheduled STA which does not allow that R-TWT scheduled STA to obtain the TXOP. In at least one embodiment/mode/case the R-TWT scheduling AP sets an arbitrary NAV in the CTS frame in response to such an RTS from the R-TWT scheduled STA. The R-TWT scheduled STA then only obtains the TXOP that equals the NAV in the CTS frame.
Further Xin teaches limitations, “receiving, after the first time period from the AP, a second frame; and disabling, based on the receiving the second frame, the contention-based channel access for the STA during the TE r-TWT SP”; see [0213].. The R-TWT scheduling AP may not respond with a CTS when it receives such an RTS from a R-TWT scheduled STA, and does not allow that R-TWT scheduled STA to obtain the TXOP. It is also possible that the R-TWT scheduling AP sets an arbitrary NAV in the CTS frame in response to such a RTS from a R-TWT scheduled STA. The R-TWT scheduled STA then only obtains the TXOP that equals the NAV in the CTS frame.
It would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill, in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention was made to consider the teachings of Xin with the teachings of Lu to make system more effective. Having a mechanism wherein enabling, based on a trigger-frame not being received from the AP during a first time period, contention-based channel access for the STA during the TE r-TWT SP; receiving, after the first time period from the AP, a second frame; and disabling, based on the receiving the second frame, the contention-based channel access for the STA during the TE r-TWT SP; greater way resources can be managed/utilized in the communication system.
Regarding claim 18, Lu in view of Xin teaches as per claim 17, sending, to the AP via contention-based channel access, a non-tngger-based frame; Xin see in [0173] under section 4.5 “termination of R-TWT SP” regarding if a R-TWT scheduled STA is to obtain a TXOP that overlaps the R-TWTx SP, it is forced to use (MU)RTS/CTS exchange to obtain that TXOP. The R-TWT scheduling AP may not respond to a CTS when it receives such RTS from a R-TWT scheduled STA which does not allow that R-TWT scheduled STA to obtain the TXOP. In at least one embodiment/mode/case the R-TWT scheduling AP sets an arbitrary NAV in the CTS frame in response to such an RTS from the R-TWT scheduled STA. The R-TWT scheduled STA then only obtains the TXOP that equals the NAV in the CTS frame..
Regarding claim 19, Lu in view of Xin teaches as per claim 17, wherein the disabling the contention-based channel access is based on an indication, in the second frame, that contention-based channel access should be suspended; Xin see [0213].. The R-TWT scheduling AP may not respond with a CTS when it receives such an RTS from a R-TWT scheduled STA, and does not allow that R-TWT scheduled STA to obtain the TXOP. It is also possible that the R-TWT scheduling AP sets an arbitrary NAV in the CTS frame in response to such a RTS from a R-TWT scheduled STA. The R-TWT scheduled STA then only obtains the TXOP that equals the NAV in the CTS frame.
Claim(s) 3 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lu (US Pub. No. 2024/0251443 A1) in view of Xin et al. (US Pub. No. 2023/0047705 A1) and in further view of Xin et al. (US Pub. No. 2023/0047705 A1), hereafter Xin1.
Regarding claim 3, Lu in view of Xin teaches as per claim 1, but Lu is silent about determining, based on the receiving the non-trigger-based frame, that contention-based channel access is enabled for the STA; however Xin1 teaches in fig. 24 about #194 about ... if the condition in block 194 is not met, then decision block 198 is reached which determines between two options. In option 2 it returns to block 192 and continues to wait on the arrival of the frames, otherwise in option 1 execution moves to block 202 in FIG. 25, which has already been described; see [0209]…and condition meets then #196 . It would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill, in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention was made to consider the teachings of Xin with the teachings of Sony in view of Lu to make system more effective. Having a mechanism wherein determining, based on the receiving the non-trigger-based frame, that contention-based channel access is enabled for the STA; greater way resources can be managed/utilized in the communication system.
Claim(s) 14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lu (US Pub. No. 2024/0251443 A1) in view of Xin et al. (US Pub. No. 2023/0047705 A1) and in further view of Yang et al. (US Pub. No. 2024/0334487 A1).
Regarding claim 14, Lu in view of Xin teaches as per claim 11, but Lu is silent about sending, via contention-free channel access based on the receiving the second frame, a data frame comprising a traffic identifier associated with the TE r-TWT; however Yang teaches in [0064] about .. based on an implementation of the second indication information in the second frame, the first STA in the BSS in which the first AP is located does not need to be restricted by the r-TWT SP information of the OBSS in a process of performing traffic corresponding to some TIDs, to ensure that traffic (for example, high-priority traffic or traffic requiring a low latency) of the first STA in the BSS in which the first AP is located is performed. It would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill, in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention was made to consider the teachings of Yang with the teachings of Lu in view of Xin to make system more standardized.
Claim(s) 8, 16, 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lu (US Pub. No. 2024/0251443 A1) in view of Xin et al. (US Pub. No. 2023/0047705 A1) and in further view of Wentink (US Pub. No. 2016/0353484 A1).
Regarding claim 8, Lu in view of Xin teaches as per claim 1, but Lu is silent about wherein the second frame comprises an indication of a start time for suspending contention-based channel access by the STA; however Wentink teaches in [0056] about .. AP 110 may transmit a CTS frame 402, also indicating the requested duration of the SAI 410, in response to RTS frame 401. Note that while time sequence diagram 400 shows AP 110 transmitting CTS frame 402, in practice the CTS frame 402 may be transmitted by any suitable STA or AP in the wireless network (e.g., such as STA2 or STA3). SAI-capable devices (e.g., AP 110, STA1 and STA2) may receive the CTS frame 402, set their respective NAVs to the duration indicated by CTS frame 402, and defer from accessing the medium using random access mechanisms (e.g., contention-based channel access mechanisms defined by the IEEE 802.11 standards). STA3—which may be a legacy device—may also receive CTS frame 402. In response, STA3 may set its NAV 404 to the duration indicated by CTS frame 402, and defer from medium access for the duration of the SAI 410.; further see [0057]. It would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill, in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention was made to consider the teachings of Wentink with the teachings of Lu in view of Xin to make system more standardized.
Regarding claim 16, Lu in view of Xin teaches as per claim 11, but Lu is silent about wherein the suspending contention-based channel access by the STA during the TE r-TWT SP is based on timing information in the second frame; however Wentink teaches in [0056] about .. AP 110 may transmit a CTS frame 402, also indicating the requested duration of the SAI 410, in response to RTS frame 401. Note that while time sequence diagram 400 shows AP 110 transmitting CTS frame 402, in practice the CTS frame 402 may be transmitted by any suitable STA or AP in the wireless network (e.g., such as STA2 or STA3). SAI-capable devices (e.g., AP 110, STA1 and STA2) may receive the CTS frame 402, set their respective NAVs to the duration indicated by CTS frame 402, and defer from accessing the medium using random access mechanisms (e.g., contention-based channel access mechanisms defined by the IEEE 802.11 standards). STA3—which may be a legacy device—may also receive CTS frame 402. In response, STA3 may set its NAV 404 to the duration indicated by CTS frame 402, and defer from medium access for the duration of the SAI 410.; further see [0057]. It would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill, in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention was made to consider the teachings of Wentink with the teachings of Lu in view of Xin to make system more standardized.
Regarding claim 20, Lu in view of Xin teaches as per claim 17, but Lu is silent about wherein the second frame comprises an indication of a start time for suspending contention-based channel access for the STA; however Wentink teaches in [0056] about .. AP 110 may transmit a CTS frame 402, also indicating the requested duration of the SAI 410, in response to RTS frame 401. Note that while time sequence diagram 400 shows AP 110 transmitting CTS frame 402, in practice the CTS frame 402 may be transmitted by any suitable STA or AP in the wireless network (e.g., such as STA2 or STA3). SAI-capable devices (e.g., AP 110, STA1 and STA2) may receive the CTS frame 402, set their respective NAVs to the duration indicated by CTS frame 402, and defer from accessing the medium using random access mechanisms (e.g., contention-based channel access mechanisms defined by the IEEE 802.11 standards). STA3—which may be a legacy device—may also receive CTS frame 402. In response, STA3 may set its NAV 404 to the duration indicated by CTS frame 402, and defer from medium access for the duration of the SAI 410.; further see [0057]. It would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill, in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention was made to consider the teachings of Wentink with the teachings of Lu in view of Xin to make system more standardized.
Claim(s) 12 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lu (US Pub. No. 2024/0251443 A1) in view of Xin et al. (US Pub. No. 2023/0047705 A1) and in further view of Turunen et al. (US Pub. No. 2014/0192724 A1).
Regarding claim 12, Lu in view of Xin teaches as per claim 11, but Lu is silent about enabling, based on a trigger-frame not being received during a first time period of the TE r-TWT SP contention-based channel access during the TE r-TWT SP; however Turunen teaches in abstract about enabling contention based access. It would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill, in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention was made to consider the teachings of Turunen with the teachings of Lu in view of Xin to make system more standardized.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Please see PTO-892 form for considered prior arts for record.
Reference Ajami et al. (US Pub. No. 2025/0184901 A1) teaches about for managing data traffic in restricted target wake time (TWT) service periods (SPs). In some aspects, an access point (AP) may transmit a packet, at the beginning of a restricted TWT SP, that signals all non-member wireless stations (STAs) to defer access to the wireless medium for at least a threshold duration. Upon receiving the packet, any non-member STAs that are associated with the AP may set their network allocation vectors (NAVs) according to the duration indicated by a duration field of the received packet. In some implementations, low-latency STAs that are members of the TWT SP may not set their NAVs according to the duration field of the received packet. Instead, the low-latency STAs may access the wireless medium before the NAVs associated with the non-member STAs expire; see abstract; further see Fig. 4B and C.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to PARTH PATEL whose telephone number is (571)270-1970. The examiner can normally be reached 7 a.m. -7 p.m. PST.
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, Jae Y. Lee can be reached at 5712703936. 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.
PARTH PATEL
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 2479
/PARTH PATEL/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2479
Prosecution Insights