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 .
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 10/15/2025 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
In response to applicant's argument that the reference Cherian et al. (U.S. Pub. No. 20210144778) fails to show certain features of applicant’s invention (i.e. “receiving, at a first station (STA), an emergence preparedness communication services (EPCS) priority access enable request frame from a second STA, wherein the EPCS priority access enable request frame includes information indicating that the EPCS priority access enable request is sent for a peer- to-peer (P2P) link”). (Emphasis Added).
In response the Examiner respectfully disagrees with the Applicant’s arguments because of the following reasons:
First, in regards to the at least limitation in question i.e. (wherein the EPCS priority access enable request frame includes information indicating that the EPCS priority access enable request is sent for a peer- to-peer (P2P) link) merely recited an intended use (purpose). An intended use recitation that appears in the body of a claimed apparatus generally does not impart a patentable distinction if it merely states an intention. Such intended use limitations would not distinguish a claimed apparatus from a prior art apparatus that satisfies all the structural limitations of the claimed apparatus. MPEP 2111.04. (Emphasis Added).
As argued and/or stated by the Applicant, the at least claimed limitation in question “includes information indicating the purpose of the message to indicate the P2P link”. Therefore, during patent examination, recitation of intended purpose or use (i.e. “for a peer- to-peer (P2P) link”) are not given patentable weight. Thus, the Applicant’s arguments with regards to the “intended purpose” of claimed limitations are invalid when given the broadest reasonable interpretations.
Secondly, the Examiner very kindly directs the Applicant to prior art reference Cherian: In fig. 1, fig. 7, #712, and ¶ [0084], discussed that STAs 104 may form networks without APs 102, while the STAs 104 may be capable of communicating with each other through the AP 102 using communication links 106, STAs 104 also can communicate directly with each other via direct wireless links 111. Additionally, two STAs 104 may communicate via a direct communication link 111 regardless of whether both STAs 104 are associated with and served by the same AP 102. In such an ad hoc system, one or more of the STAs 104 may assume the role filled by the AP 102 in a BSS. (Emphasis Added).
Furthermore, based on the discussion above, STAs 104 communicate directly (without using AP 102) to exchange frames (e.g. a priority access request frame and/or a priority access response frame) using direct link in the invention of Cherian e.g. fig. 1 and fig. 7. As it is readily understood by any one of ordinary skill in the art, P2P link in an example of direct link. Cherian further stated that “Examples of direct wireless links 111 include Wi-Fi Direct connections, connections established by using a Wi-Fi Tunneled Direct Link Setup (TDLS) link, and other P2P group connections” (see pp0084). (Emphasis Added).
Thus, the claim does not uniquely and particularly define the limitation "wherein the EPCS priority access enable request frame includes information indicating that the EPCS priority access enable request is sent for a peer- to-peer (P2P) link" so as to distinguish from the applied prior art. During patent examination, the claims must be given their broadest reasonable interpretation. See also MPEP §2111. The at least limitation is broadly claimed, therefore, is fairly characterized as communicating or exchanging national security and emergency preparedness (NSEP) priority access service request and/or response frame via or over direct wireless link (i.e. P2P connection) (see fig. 1, fig. 7, pp0021, pp0084, and pp0112). (Emphasis Added).
Therefore, the previous rejection is maintained.
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.
Claim(s) 19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Cherian et al. (US Publication No. 20210144778).
As to claim 19, Cherian teaches a method comprising: receiving, at a first station (STA), an emergence preparedness communication services (EPCS) priority access enable request frame from a second STA (fig. 1, pp0021, the first STA is a national security and emergency preparedness (NSEP) STA, pp0084, STAs 104 also can communicate directly with each other via direct wireless links 111, and one or more of the STAs 104 may assume the role filled by the AP 102, fig. 7, pp0112, the priority STA 144 may send a message (such as a priority access request message 611) that indicates the priority STA 144 is requesting the priority access service, and the, AP 102 may send a priority service response message (not shown) to the priority STA 144 to indicate that the priority access service was successfully enabled for the priority STA 144), wherein the EPCS priority access enable request frame includes information indicating that the EPCS priority access enable request is sent for a peer-to-peer (P2P) link (fig. 1, fig. 7, pp0084, STAs 104 also can communicate directly with each other via direct wireless links 111, and one or more of the STAs 104 may assume the role filled by the AP 102, Examples of direct wireless links 111 include Wi-Fi Direct connections, connections established by using a Wi-Fi Tunneled Direct Link Setup (TDLS) link, and other P2P group connections, and pp0112, pp0021); and transmitting, by the first STA, an EPCS priority access enable response frame to the second STA in response to the EPCS priority access enable request frame (fig. 1, pp0021, the first STA is a national security and emergency preparedness (NSEP) STA, pp0084, STAs 104 also can communicate directly with each other via direct wireless links 111, and one or more of the STAs 104 may assume the role filled by the AP 102, fig. 7, pp0112, the priority STA 144 may send a message (such as a priority access request message 611) that indicates the priority STA 144 is requesting the priority access service, and the, AP 102 may send a priority service response message (not shown) to the priority STA 144 to indicate that the priority access service was successfully enabled for the priority STA 144).
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.
Claim(s) 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Cherian et al. (US Publication No. 20210144778) in view of Viger et al. (US Publication No. 20230119901).
As to claim 20, Cherian teaches the limitations of the independent claim as discussed above. Cherian further teaches that the P2P link comprises a Tunneled Direct Link Setup (TDLS) link (fig. 1, fig. 7, pp0084, direct wireless links 111 include Wi-Fi Direct connections, connections established by using a Wi-Fi Tunneled Direct Link Setup (TDLS) link). However, fails to explicitly teach wherein: the first STA and the second STA are affiliated with different multi-link devices (MLDs), and comprises link between the MLDs.
In an analogous field of endeavor, Viger teaches wherein: the first STA and the second STA are affiliated with different multi-link devices (MLDs), and comprises link between the MLDs (fig. 5B, #503, and pp0117, establishing 530 a third direct link 503 between the first MLE STA 222 and the second MLE STA 224, and pp0151). Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the teachings of Cherian with the teachings of Viger to achieve the goal of efficiently and reliably providing efficient use of the resources of a wireless local-area network (WLAN) is important to provide bandwidth and acceptable response times to the users of the WLAN (Viger, pp0010).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 1-18, are allowed.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: The prior art references of record (i.e. Cherian and Viger) does not teach the at least indicated portion of the claim of a method, comprising: detecting, at an access point (AP), that a station (STA) is in an emergency preparedness communication services (EPCS) mode; responsive to detecting that the STA is in the EPCS mode, transmitting a beacon frame to another AP, wherein the beacon frame includes a first information element (IE) indicating that EPCS is activated for the STA and wherein the beacon frame indicates for the other AP to turn off overlapping basic service set preamble detection (OBSS/PD); and transmitting EPCS data to the STA while the other AP has OBSS/PD turned off.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to OMONIYI OBAYANJU whose telephone number is (571)270-5885. The examiner can normally be reached M-Thur 10:30-7pm.
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, ANTHONY S ADDY can be reached at (571) 272-7795. 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.
/OMONIYI OBAYANJU/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2645