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 is/are pending.
Drawings are accepted.
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.
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, 9, and 17 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Cariou at el. - (US 2023/0139206) in view of Kneckt et al. (US 2022/0419022).
As to claims 1, 9:
Cariou discloses:
A non-transitory computer readable medium storing instructions for execution to perform an operation, and A device, the device comprising processing circuitry coupled to storage, the processing circuitry configured to perform said operation (Abstract, ¶0306, device with processor/memory and CRM), comprising: establish a non-collocated multi-link device (MLD) with multiple affiliated access points (APs) that are not geographically collocated;
(See at least Abstract, Figs. 1B-C, ¶0002, 0045-0050, ¶0070, 0088, operating a non-collocated AP MLD established from multiple APs that are dispersed over a geographical area)
Regarding:
generate a reconfiguration multi-link element for removal of an affiliated AP within the non-collocated MLD; and include the reconfiguration multi-link element in beacon or probe response frames transmitted by any AP affiliated with the non-collocated MLD and in the same collocated set.
Cariou disclose the device performing adding/removal of an affiliated AP within the non-collocated MLD as part of transition between sets (See Abstract, 1B, 2N, claims 1, 3, 13, 18 where multi-link element is generated for adding new links to a second AP MLD affiliated with the non-collocated AP MLD and later moving old links. ¶0072-0073), Cariou further discloses in ¶0227, 0228 that multi-link element may be carried in a beacon or probe response frames.
Cariou does not explicitly disclose the multi-link element generated in beacon/probe response transmitted specifically by APs that affiliated with the non-collocated MLD and belong to the same collocated set.
Kneckt, however, in a same field of MLD link reconfiguration, teaches the use of a reconfiguration multi-link element to communicate adding/removal of a link (AP) and further teaches including the multi-reconfiguration element in beacon and probe transmitted by APs of the same collocated set in MLD (See at least ¶0166, 0169, 0178, 0179, 0186-0193, Fig. 30, 34)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing time of the invention to modify the non-collocated MLD and link-removal teaching in Cariou so that the multi-link element used for removal is included in beacon/probe response of APs of the same collocated set. As both Kneckt and Cariou teach both the removal of affiliated links via multi-link element and ability to place the multi-link element in beacons, it is within PHOSITA’s contemplation to have the remaining APs of the same collocated set to announce the removal/addition via their own beacons. Doing so would efficiently inform STAs/APs of the changes in links without requiring individual unicasting, thus reducing signal overheads.
Claim 17 is directed to a method with steps as performed by the CRM/device of claim 1 and/or 8 and thus is rejected by the same reasoning.
Claim(s) 2-6, 8, 10-14, 16, 18-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Cariou at el. (US 2023/0139206) in view of Kneckt et al. (US 2022/0419022) and in further view of Huang et al. (US 2023/0125078).
As to claims 2, 10, 18:
Cariou in view of Kneckt discloses all limitations of claim 1/9/17, wherein the processing circuitry is further configured to generate Per-STA profile information for the AP that is being removed, including Link ID information (See Cariou, ¶0072-0075), however is silent on AP Removal Timer.
Huang, in a related of field of MLD link configuration, discloses Per-STA profile information for the AP being removed as well as the AP removal timer in at least ¶0016, 0077, i.e. delete timer for each link profile.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing time of the invention that the Per-STA profile information in the system of Cariou/Kneckt to include the AP removal timer. As stated by Huang, ¶0016, such a timer is standard in 802.11, and furthermore, without such a timer, stations would have no coordinated way of knowing when an AP is removed or disengaged. As such the benefit would include at least better coordination and avoidance of packet loss.
As to claims 3, 11, 19:
Cariou in view of Kneckt and Huang discloses all limitations of claim 2/10/18, wherein the Per-STA profile information also includes an identifier of the collocated set or the collocated AP MLD that overlaps with this collocated set. (See at least Cariou, Figs 1B, 2N, ¶058-0064, 0241-0245, ID for collocated AP MLDs vs. non-collocated MLD, i.e. identifiers, mapping tables that associate collocated IDs with non-collocated IDs)
As to claims 4, 12, 20:
Cariou in view of Kneckt and Huang discloses all limitations of claim 3/11/19, wherein the identifier of the collocated set or the collocated AP MLD is an MLD MAC address of the collocated AP MLD with which it overlaps. (See at least Cariou, Figs 1B, 2N, ¶058-0064, 0241-0245, MLD MAC address)
As to claims 5, 13:
Cariou in view of Kneckt and Huang discloses all limitations of claim 3/11, wherein the identifier of the collocated set or the collocated AP MLD is a collocated set ID. ( see at least 1B, 0058-0064, 0241-0245, Cariou teaches the use of identifiers for collocated AP MLDS within a non-collocated AP MLD, including MLD MA addresses and MLDs, and maintains mapping tables that associate AP MLD identifiers with non-collocated link IDs, i.e. the concept of identifying a particular collocated group of APs that belong to larger non-collocated MLD is clearly present).
As to claims 6, 14:
Cariou in view of Kneckt and Huang discloses all limitations of claim 2/10, wherein the processing circuitry is further configured to include the per-STA profile information in the reconfiguration multi-link element of the beacon and probe response frames transmitted by any reporting ap affiliated with the same non-collocated ap MLD and in a different collocated set.
(See Cariou, at least ¶072, generating of multi-link element containing Per-STA profile information with link ID for link removal in beacon/probes (¶0227, 0228. The specific requirement that the reporting AP belongs to a different collocated set from the AP being removed is a natural result of the non-collocated setting taught by Cariou, i.e. when an AP is removed, the remaining APs in the set are the entities that continue to operate and perform the announcement)
As to claims 8, 16:
Cariou in view of Kneckt discloses all limitations of claim 1/9, regarding: the Reconfiguration Multi-link element includes a Per-STA Profile sub-element with a Link ID subfield to identify the AP being removed, and an AP Removal Timer subfield to set a number of target beacon transmission times (TBTTs) before the AP is removed.
Cariou discloses in at least ¶000-0072, link ID subfields for Per-STA profiles. Also Kneckt ¶0166, 0178-0179, however is silent on AP Removal Timer.
Huang, in a related of field of MLD link configuration, discloses Per-STA profile information for the AP being removed as well as the AP removal timer in at least ¶0016, 0077, i.e. delete timer for each link profile.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing time of the invention that the Per-STA profile information in the system of Cariou/Kneckt to include the AP removal timer. As stated by Huang, ¶0016, such a timer is standard in 802.11, and furthermore, without such a timer, stations would have no coordinated way of knowing when an AP is removed or disengaged. As such the benefit would include at least better coordination and avoidance of packet loss.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 7, 15 is/are 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.
Claim 7 is depended on claim 6 and recites “the inclusion of the Per-STA profile information in the Reconfiguration Multi-link element is valid only if the reporting AP is operating on a link that is a setup link for an associated non-AP MLD that also has the link corresponding to the removed AP as a setup link”. The references of record disclose the MLD link configuration management as applied above, however do not disclose “Per-STA profile information in the Reconfiguration Multi-link element is valid only if the reporting AP is operating on a link that is a setup link for an associated non-AP MLD that also has the link corresponding to the removed AP as a setup link”.
The same reasoning is applied for the corresponding claim 15.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
US 2023/0128996 - Logic to generate and parse a medium access control (MAC) request frame to associate a non-AP MLD with the non-collocated AP MLD, the MAC request frame to comprise an address field, wherein the address field comprises a receiver address (RA) that identifies the first AP MLD, and a recipient field comprising a value, wherein the value comprises a MAC address to identify the non-collocated AP MLD, a MLD identifier (ID) of the non-collocated AP MLD, a flag to indicate whether the MAC frame is addressed to the non-collocated AP MLD or is addressed to the first AP MLD, or a combination thereof. Logic to determine that the MAC request frame is addressed to the non-collocated AP MLD based on the value. And logic to generate a mapping table for a new link ID or transmit the new link ID associated with the non-collocated AP MLD in an association response frame.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to QUAN M HUA whose telephone number is (571)270-7232. The examiner can normally be reached 10:30-6:30.
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 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.
/QUAN M HUA/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2645
Prosecution Insights