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, 3, 4, 5, 7-9, 12-14, and 17-22 are currently pending.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a):
(a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention.
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112:
The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor of carrying out his invention.
Claims 1, 3, 4, 5, 7-9, 12-14, and 17-22 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention.
Claim 1 recites the limitation "the extender to clear its configuration without resetting or rebooting the extender”. However, the Specification does not provide explicitly support for clearing its configuration without resetting or rebooting the extender. Applicant states in the remarks that the specification (Applicant’s specification) providing no teaching or even suggestion of resetting or rebooting the extender in response to receiving the message to clear its configurations. However, any negative limitation or exclusionary proviso must have basis in the original disclosure. If alternative elements are positively recited in the specification, they may be explicitly excluded in the claims. See In re Johnson, 558 F.2d 1008, 1019, 194 USPQ 187, 196 (CCPA 1977) (“[the] specification, having described the whole, necessarily described the part remaining.”). See also Ex parte Grasselli, 231 USPQ 393 (Bd. App. 1983), aff’d mem., 738 F.2d 453 (Fed. Cir. 1984). The mere absence of a positive recitation is not basis for an exclusion. Any claim containing a negative limitation which does not have basis in the original disclosure should be rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112, first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement. There is a similar problem in independent claims 5, 9, and 14. Other dependent claims are rejected based on the virtue of their dependency on the rejected base claims.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 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) 1, 3, 4, 5, 7-9, 12-14, and 17-18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a) (1) as being anticipated by Taskin et al. (US 20230080739 A1).
Regarding claim 1, Taskin et al. disclose a root node for a wireless network having an extender, the root node comprising communication hardware connected to a processor configured to cause the root node to transmit a message to the extender as part of a factory reset of the root node (paragraphs [0246-0247] and fig. 1; EMNM controller (of access point/gateway) may issue vendor-specific 1905 message towards an EMNM agent t to indicate if factory-reset is required), wherein the message instructs the extender to clear its configurations without resetting or rebooting the extender (paragraph [0246]; reset its configuration with exception of information related to backhaul infrastructure SSID. Thus with the exception, the extender is not entirely reset); and as part of the factory reset of the root node, the root node is configured to clear its configurations and be automatically re-configured with its default home SSID (paragraphs [0245-0246]; resetting an extender to factory state (reset its configuration to restored defaults for factory reset)).
Regarding claim 4, Taskin et al. further suggest wherein the WiFi network conforms to an IEEE 1905.1a standard (paragraph [0017]; WiFi EasyMesh using IEEE 1905.1 message).
Regarding claim 5, Taskin et al. disclose a method for a root node in a wireless network having an extender, the method comprising the root node transmitting a message to the extender as part of a factory reset of the root node (paragraphs [0246-0247] and fig. 1; EMNM controller (of access point/gateway) may issue vendor-specific 1905 message towards an EMNM agent t to indicate if factory-reset is required), wherein the message instructs the extender to clear its configurations without resetting or rebooting the extender (paragraph [0246]; reset its configuration with exception of information related to backhaul infrastructure SSID. Thus with the exception, the extender is not entirely reset); and as part of the factory reset of the root node, the root node is configured to clear its configurations and be automatically re-configured with its default home SSID (paragraphs [0245-0246]; resetting an extender to factory state (reset all its configuration to restored defaults for factory reset)).
Regarding claim 7, Taskin et al. further suggest wherein the wireless network is a WiFi network (paragraph [0017]).
Regarding claim 8, Taskin et al. further suggest wherein the WiFi network conforms to an IEEE 1905.1a standard (paragraph [0017]; WiFi EasyMesh using IEEE 1905.1 message).
Regarding claim 9, Taskin et al. disclose an extender for a wireless network having a root node, the extender comprising communication hardware connected to a processor configured to cause the extender to clear its configurations without resetting or rebooting the extender upon receiving a message from the root node instructing the extender to clear its configurations including any guest SSIDs, any home SSIDs, any gaming SSIDs, and any port-forwarding configurations (paragraphs [0247-0248] [0245-0247]; EMNM Agent triggers the device it manages to perform the reboot or reset its configurations when instructed by EMNM controller) (paragraph [0246]; reset its configuration with exception of information related to backhaul infrastructure SSID. Thus with the exception, the extender is not entirely reset) (paragraphs [0246-0247] and fig. 1; EMNM controller (of access point/gateway) may issue vendor-specific 1905 message towards an EMNM agent t to indicate if factory-reset is required) (paragraphs [0245-0246]; resetting an extender to factory state (reset its configuration to restored defaults for factory reset)); wherein, upon clearing its configurations, the extender is configured to automatically perform an onboarding procedure with the root node to acquire a home SSID from the root node (paragraph [0246]; reset its configuration with exception of information related to backhaul infrastructure SSID) (paragraph [0273]; onboarding EMNM Agent requests network configuration information from the EMNM Controller (configurator) by exchanging DPP Configuration Protocol messages with the Multi-AP Controller).
Regarding claim 12, Taskin et al. further suggest wherein the wireless network is a WiFi network (paragraph [0017]).
Regarding claim 13, Taskin et al. further suggest wherein the WiFi network conforms to an IEEE 1905.1 a standard (paragraph [0017]; WiFi EasyMesh using IEEE 1905.1 message).
Regarding claim 14, Taskin et al. disclose a method for an extender in a wireless network having a root node, the method comprises the extender clearing its configurations upon receiving a message from the root node instructing the extender to clear its configurations without resetting or rebooting the extender upon receiving a message from the root node instructing the extender to clear its configurations including any guest SSIDs, any home SSIDs, any gaming SSIDs, and any port-forwarding configurations (paragraphs [0247-0248] [0245-0247]; EMNM Agent triggers the device it manages to perform the reboot or reset its configurations when instructed by EMNM controller) (paragraph [0246]; reset its configuration with exception of information related to backhaul infrastructure SSID. Thus with the exception, the extender is not entirely reset) (paragraphs [0246-0247] and fig. 1; EMNM controller (of access point/gateway) may issue vendor-specific 1905 message towards an EMNM agent t to indicate if factory-reset is required) (paragraphs [0245-0246]; resetting an extender to factory state (reset its configuration to restored defaults for factory reset)); wherein, upon clearing its configurations, the extender is configured to automatically perform an onboarding procedure with the root node to acquire a home SSID from the root node (paragraph [0246]; reset its configuration with exception of information related to backhaul infrastructure SSID) (paragraph [0273]; onboarding EMNM Agent requests network configuration information from the EMNM Controller (configurator) by exchanging DPP Configuration Protocol messages with the Multi-AP Controller).
Regarding claim 17, Taskin et al. further suggest wherein the wireless network is a WiFi network (paragraph [0017]).
Regarding claim 18, Taskin et al. further suggest wherein the WiFi network conforms to an IEEE 1905.1a standard (paragraph [0017]; WiFi EasyMesh using IEEE 1905.1 message).
Response to Remarks/Arguments
Applicant's remarks/arguments filed 10/08/2025 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. On page 5 of the Applicant’s remarks regarding claims 1 and 5, Applicant submits that support for the amendments to claim 1 is found, for example, in previously pending (now canceled) claim 2 and the specification providing no teaching or even suggestion of resetting or rebooting the extender in response to receiving the message to clear its configurations. However, the Examiner respectfully disagrees because any negative limitation (without resetting or rebooting the extender) or exclusionary proviso must have basis in the original disclosure (please see the rejection above). Further, the Applicant also submits that Taskin teaches the master access point 310 resetting or rebooting the extender access point 320. See, e.g., Taskin paragraphs [0245]-[0246]. There is no teaching or even suggestion in Taskin of the master access point 310 sending a message to the extender access point 320 instructing the extender access point 320 to clear its configurations without resetting or rebooting the extender access point 320. In response to Applicant’s remarks that Taskin’s master access point resetting or rebooting the extender access point which is not required by Applicant’s invention, the fact that it discloses the additional step of resetting not claimed is irrelevant. Moreover, Taskin, in paragraph [0246], discloses resetting its configuration with exception of information related to backhaul infrastructure SSID. Thus with the exception, the extender is not entirely reset. Therefore the claims 1 and 5 have been rejected and maintained for at least the reasons discussed. Independent claims 9 and 14 have also been rejected and maintained for at least similar reasons discussed with respect to claim 1 above.
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. 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 HOANG-CHUONG Q VU whose telephone number is (571)270-3945. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday (9:30-5:30 PM EST.).
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, AYAZ SHEIKH can be reached at 571-272-3795. 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.
HOANG-CHUONG Q. VU
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 2476
/HOANG-CHUONG Q VU/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2476