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 .
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement filed 06/26/2024 fails to comply with 37 CFR 1.98(a)(2), which requires a legible copy of each cited foreign patent document; each non-patent literature publication or that portion which caused it to be listed; and all other information or that portion which caused it to be listed. It has been placed in the application file, but the information referred to therein has not been considered: WORKING GROUP OF THE LAN/MAN STANDARDS COMMITTEE OF THE IEEE COMPUTER SOCIETY, IEEE P802.11be, version D3.2, June 1, 2023, 1191 pages. URL for Standard – https://grouper.ieee.org/groups/802/11/private/Draft_Standards/11be/Draft%20P802.11be_D3.2_redline_D3.0.pdf. Applicant is advised that the date of any re-submission of any item of information contained in this information disclosure statement or the submission of any missing element(s) will be the date of submission for purposes of determining compliance with the requirements based on the time of filing the statement, including all certification requirements for statements under 37 CFR 1.97(e). See MPEP § 609.05(a).
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)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1-2, 7-11 and 16-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Sevin et al. (US 2025/0227788 A1), hereinafter “SEVIN”.
Regarding claim 1, SEVIN teaches, ‘An apparatus, the apparatus comprising processing circuitry coupled to storage, the processing circuitry configured to:’ (Paragraphs [0261]-[0263]: FIG. 10 schematically illustrates a communication device 1000, typically any of the MLDs discussed above, of a wireless network, configured to implement at least one embodiment of the present invention… The communication device 1000 comprises a communication bus 1013 to which there are preferably connected: a central processing unit 1001, such as a processor, denoted CPU; a memory 1003 for storing an executable code of methods or steps of the methods according to embodiments of the invention as well as the registers adapted to record variables and parameters necessary for implementing the methods):
‘initiate a frame exchange using an initial control frame with constraints regarding transmission format and data rate, starting a Transmit Opportunity (TXOP) in Enhanced Multi-Link Single-Radio (EMLSR) operation;’ (Paragraph [0104]: When the AP MLD 110 intends to initiate frame exchanges with one or more non-AP MLDs on one of the EMLSR links, it begins the frame exchanges by transmitting the initial Control frame 245 which explicitly triggers the non-AP MLD. The initial Control frame of frame exchanges is sent in the OFDM PPDU or non-HT duplicate PPDU format using a rate of 6 Mbps, 12 Mbps, or 24 Mbps. As defined in the D1.5 Standard, the initial Control frame may be an MU-RTS Trigger frame or a BSRP Trigger frame as defined in IEEE Std 802.11ax™-2021; Paragraph [0045]: wherein the frame exchange does not involve the non-AP MLD (e.g. no RU is scheduled or eligible to the non-AP MLD; more generally an initiated TXOP does not involve the non-AP MLD);
‘select a communication link from multiple available links based on the link availability and/or Out of Band Station (OBSS) transmission status;’ (Paragraph [0141]: Indeed, upon detecting that the shared link is now busy for a given period due to a frame exchange sequence with the other non-AP MLD initiated by the AP MLD on this link, the not-explicitly-triggered non-AP MLD can set this link as unusable, i.e. switches it in a state where no frame exchange is possible, but can make its second link of the EMLSR links as available for frame exchange, by switching it in an appropriate state. The initial control frame from the non-AP MLD is no longer required on this second link to initiate this frame exchange; Paragraph [0104]: Each of non-AP MLDs 120, 130 is able to listen simultaneously on its EMLSR links, by having its EMLSR co-affiliated STA(s) corresponding to those links in "awake" or "listening operation" state… The listening operation includes CCA (Clear Channel Assessment) and receiving an initial Control frame of frame exchanges that is initiated by the AP MLD);
‘define a predetermined time period for EMLSR service and manage frame exchanges within this period;’ (Paragraphs [0107]-[0108]: After receiving the initial Control frame of frame exchanges 245 and transmitting an immediate response frame 246 as a response to the initial Control frame, the STA affiliated with the non-AP MLD that was listening on the corresponding link… is configured to be able to transmit or receive frames on the enabled link in which the initial Control frame 245 was received… To do so, the receiving EMLSR co-affiliated STA is switched, after a link switch delay, from the listening operation state 241 to an "active frame exchange" or "enabled frame exchange" state… Simultaneously, the other EMLSR co-affiliated STAs of the same non-AP MLD… are configured not to transmit or receive on the other EMLSR link(s) until the end of the frame exchanges; Paragraph [0113]: An exemplary frame exchange sequence is shown in the Figure that includes the sending of an A-MPDU frame 255 by the affiliated AP API to the EMLSR co-affiliated STA A1 of explicitly triggered non-AP MLD A 120, followed by a corresponding block acknowledgment 256 from the latter);
‘and transition to a listening operation once a predefined EMLSR service period is completed.’ (Paragraph [0115]: After the end of the frame exchanges operated by the receiving EMLSR co-affiliated STA plus an EMLSR Transition Delay specified in the EML capabilities, the non-AP MLD 120 switches back to the EMLSR listening operation state, meaning that the receiving EMLSR co-affiliated STA A1 switches back to the listening operation state 241 as well as the other EMLSR co-affiliated STAs A2 (listening operation state 242); Paragraphs [0117]-[0118]: An end of frame exchanges can be sensed by a non-AP MLD, here non-AP MLD 120, if one of the following conditions is met: (1) The MAC of the STA affiliated with the non-AP MLD that received the initial Control frame 245 does not receive a PHY-RXSTART.indication primitive during a timeout interval; Paragraph [0127]: As both non-AP MLD 120 and 130 are now in the EMLSR listening operation mode, the AP MLD may initiate any new frame exchange sequence).
Regarding claims 2, 11 and 20, SEVIN teaches, The apparatus of claim 1, ‘wherein the initial control frame is an MU-RTS frame or a BSRP trigger frame.’ (Paragraph [0104]: When the AP MLD 110 intends to initiate frame exchanges with one or more non-AP MLDs on one of the EMLSR links, it begins the frame exchanges by transmitting the initial Control frame 245 which explicitly triggers the non-AP MLD. The initial Control frame of frame exchanges is sent in the OFDM PPDU or non-HT duplicate PPDU format using a rate of 6 Mbps, 12 Mbps, or 24 Mbps. As defined in the D1.5 Standard, the initial Control frame may be an MU-RTS Trigger frame or a BSRP Trigger frame as defined in IEEE Std 802.11ax™-2021; Paragraphs [0146]-[0148]: The initial Control frame is typically a MU-RTS Trigger frame or a BSRP Trigger frame. The MU-RTS Trigger frame relates to so-called MU-RTS/CTS procedure introduced in IEEE Std 802.11ax™-2021 and corresponds to an extension of the RTS/CTS handshake mechanism used to reserve the channel in multi-user UL/DL scenarios. It allows an AP to reserve a TXOP for multi-user transmission by sending a multi-user request control frame, noted MU-RTS frame… The BSRP Trigger frame relates to Buffer Status Report Poll (BSRP) procedure introduced in IEEE Std 802.11ax™-2021 in order to solicit the uplink data requirements of solicited STAs).
Regarding claims 7 and 16, SEVIN teaches, The apparatus of claim 1, ‘wherein the processing circuitry is further configured to prioritize communication links based on their availability and/or OBSS transmission status.’ (Paragraph [0141]: Indeed, upon detecting that the shared link is now busy for a given period due to a frame exchange sequence with the other non-AP MLD initiated by the AP MLD on this link, the not-explicitly-triggered non-AP MLD can set this link as unusable, i.e. switches it in a state where no frame exchange is possible, but can make its second link of the EMLSR links as available for frame exchange, by switching it in an appropriate state. The initial control frame from the non-AP MLD is no longer required on this second link to initiate this frame exchange; Paragraph [0135]: Indeed, it is preferable to give the radio resource to the other EMLSR co-affiliated STA which operates on another channel/band during this period where link 162 is busy; Paragraph [0132]: If the AP MLD 110 desires to engage frame exchanges with the not-explicitly-triggered non-AP MLD B 130, it only has link 161 with affiliated AP AP1 111 that is available (because the channel of link 162 with AP2 112 is busy due to the communication 275-276)).
Regarding claims 8 and 17, SEVIN teaches, The apparatus of claim 1, ‘wherein the processing circuitry is further configured to manage frame exchanges without knowledge of activities on other links during the EMLSR service period.’ (Paragraphs [0108]-[0109]: Simultaneously, the other EMLSR co-affiliated STAs of the same non-AP MLD, i.e. STAA2 in the example, are configured not to transmit or receive on the other EMLSR link(s) until the end of the frame exchanges. To do so, the other EMLSR co-affiliated STAs are switched from the listening operation state 242 to a "blindness frame" or "disabled frame exchange" state, referenced 252 in the Figure. In particular, no data is transmitted by the AP MLD intended to these other EMLSR co-affiliated STAs. The state switches of all the EMLSR co-affiliated STAs within the same non-AP MLD are inseparable, because it is a question of allocating a full radio resource chain (see FIG. 9 below) to one of the STAs while the other are deprived of such chain; Paragraphs [0258]-[0259]: The diagram on the bottom center illustrates the functioning of the MLD when the non-AP MLD is in the EMLMR frame exchange mode in which link 1 is the link over which the initial Control frame has been received. The EMLSR co-affiliated STA corresponding to link 1 is in the enabled frame exchange state, while the other EMLSR co-affiliated STA is in the disabled frame exchange state. In that case, the full radio resource chain 915a/920a is connected to the receiving ELMSR co-affiliated STA… while the other ELMSR co-affiliated STA (PHY 905b, MAC 900b) is not connected to a radio chain. Only one link is available… On the other hand, the other ELMSR co-affiliated STA has no longer a full radio stack, hence is no longer capable to receive and transmit frames. Again only one link is available (SEVIN discloses, disabling the other EMLSR co-affiliated STAs during the frame exchange period, thereby preventing those STAs from transmitting or receiving on the other links. In view of this disabling, the other links are not used during that period, and independent awareness of their activity would not be necessary for their disabled operation)).
Regarding claims 9 and 18, SEVIN teaches, The apparatus of claim 1, ‘wherein the processing circuitry is further configured to transmit initial control frames using a non-HT PPDU format with a data rate below a specific threshold during the EMLSR service period.’ (Paragraph [0104]: When the AP MLD 110 intends to initiate frame exchanges with one or more non-AP MLDs on one of the EMLSR links, it begins the frame exchanges by transmitting the initial Control frame 245 which explicitly triggers the non-AP MLD. The initial Control frame of frame exchanges is sent in the OFDM PPDU or non-HT duplicate PPDU format using a rate of 6 Mbps, 12 Mbps, or 24 Mbps. As defined in the D1.5 Standard, the initial Control frame may be an MU-RTS Trigger frame or a BSRP Trigger frame as defined in IEEE Std 802.11ax™-2021; Paragraph [0146]: The initial Control frame is typically a MU-RTS Trigger frame or a BSRP Trigger frame).
Regarding claims 10 and 19, the claims include features identical to the subject matter mentioned in the rejection to claim 1. The claims are mere reformulation of claim 1 in order to define the corresponding non-transitory computer-readable medium and method and the rejection to claim 1 are applied hereto.
For claim 10, SEVIN teaches, ‘A non-transitory computer-readable medium storing computer-executable instructions which when executed by one or more processors result in performing operations comprising:’ (Paragraph [0054]: Another aspect of the invention relates to a non-transitory computer-readable medium storing a program which, when executed by a microprocessor or computer system in a wireless device, causes the wireless device to perform any method as defined above):
For claim 19, SEVIN teaches, ‘A method comprising: …, by one or more processors,’ (Paragraph [0053]: Correlatively, the invention also provides a wireless communication device comprising at least one microprocessor configured for carrying out the steps of any of the above methods),
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.
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.
Claims 3-4 and 12-13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over SEVIN in view of Dong (US 2025/0234378 A1), hereinafter “DONG”.
Regarding claims 3 and 12, SEVIN teaches, The apparatus of claim 1, SEVIN does not explicitly teach but DONG teaches, ‘wherein the processing circuitry is further configured to set the time period for EMLSR service to be equal to or shorter than a Network Allocation Vector (NAV) associated with another communication link.’ (DONG – Paragraph [0036]: The Non-AP MLD may receive a radio frame in each communication link in the enabled state, and when sensing that a channel is busy, the Non-AP MLD sets a network allocation vector (NAV) timer of the Non-AP MLD itself to identify that the channel is busy. The NAV timer is used to implement virtual carrier sensing, when the NAV timer is not 0, it indicates that the channel is busy, and when the NAV timer is 0, it indicates that the channel is idle; Paragraphs [0052]-[0054]: In an optional embodiment, performing processing on the NAV timer of the first communication link during the process of the frame exchange includes: determining a remaining duration of the NAV timer of the first communication link; determining a duration of the frame exchange; and performing processing on the NAV timer… according to the duration of the frame exchange and the remaining duration; Paragraphs [0056]-[0058]: In some optional embodiments, performing processing on the NAV timer of the first communication link during the process of the frame exchange according to the duration of the frame exchange and the remaining duration includes: when the remaining duration of the NAV timer… is greater than the duration of the frame exchange, updating the remaining duration… to a first duration…; and when the remaining duration… is less than or equal to the duration of the frame exchange, updating the remaining duration… to 0 during the process of the frame exchange).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to have known to combine the teachings of DONG with SEVIN because both are in the same/similar field of endeavor. The advantage of incorporating the above limitation(s) of DONG into SEVIN is that DONG provides an established mechanism for assessing and updating remaining NAV durations on unselected links relative to the duration of an ongoing frame exchange by a NAV timer comparison rules to ensure that when a device finishes a frame exchange and returns to listening mode on another link, it accurately knows whether that channel is busy or idle. This avoids premature channel access and prevents data collisions (See paragraph [0035], [0052]-[0058], DONG).
Regarding claims 4 and 13, SEVIN teaches, The apparatus of claim 1, ‘wherein the processing circuitry is further configured to transition back to a listening operation … if the EMLSR service period has been completed.’ (Paragraph [0032]: In other embodiments, the method further comprises, at the non-AP MLD being in the active EMLSR mode, switching the first and second affiliated STAs back to the listening operation state upon detecting an end of frame exchanges over the second link. Exemplary conditions defining such end of frame exchanges are defined in the D1.5 Standard, section 35.3.17. This allows the non-AP MLD to return in a ( conventional) state independently to the frame exchanges occurring over the channel of the first link. Consequently, the non-AP MLD is ready again to fully use the EMLSR mode with the AP MLD. Paragraph [0115]: After the end of the frame exchanges operated by the receiving EMLSR co-affiliated STA plus an EMLSR Transition Delay specified in the EML capabilities, the non-AP MLD 120 switches back to the EMLSR listening operation state, meaning that the receiving EMLSR co-affiliated STA A1 switches back to the listening operation state 241 as well as the other EMLSR co-affiliated STAs A2 (listening operation state 242).
SEVIN does not explicitly teach but DONG teaches, ‘…at the end of a NAV duration…’ (DONG – Paragraph [0036]: The Non-AP MLD may receive a radio frame in each communication link in the enabled state, and when sensing that a channel is busy, the Non-AP MLD sets a network allocation vector (NAV) timer of the Non-AP MLD itself to identify that the channel is busy. The NAV timer is used to implement virtual carrier sensing, when the NAV timer is not 0, it indicates that the channel is busy, and when the NAV timer is 0, it indicates that the channel is idle; Paragraph [0062]: When the remaining duration of the NAV timer is less than or equal to the duration of the frame exchange, the
NAV timer is set to a suspended state in the process of the frame exchange, and the remaining duration of the NAV timer is updated to 0 in the process of the frame exchange. After the process of the frame exchange is completed, a listening state is switched to in the STR link corresponding to the NAV timer, and since the remaining duration of the NAV timer is 0, it may indicate that the corresponding channel is in an idle state; Paragraph [0069]: In an optional embodiment, the Non-AP MLD needs to wait for a same time as the process duration, and then switch to the listening state in each enabled communication link (the first communication link and the second communication link); Paragraph [0076]: When the Non-AP MLD is in the NSTR mode, after receiving a non-initial control frame through any one enabled NSTR link and waiting for the process duration of the non-initial control frame, the Non-AP MLD performs listening operation again in each enabled NSTR link)…
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to have known to combine the teachings of DONG with SEVIN because both are in the same/similar field of endeavor. The advantage of incorporating the above limitation(s) of DONG into SEVIN is that DONG provides an established mechanism for assessing and updating remaining NAV durations on unselected links relative to the duration of an ongoing frame exchange by a NAV timer comparison rules to ensure that when a device finishes a frame exchange and returns to listening mode on another link, it accurately knows whether that channel is busy or idle. This avoids premature channel access and prevents data collisions (See paragraph [0035], [0052]-[0058], DONG).
Claims 5-6 and 14-15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over SEVIN in view of Lorgeoux et al. (US 2025/0365779 A1), hereinafter “LORGEOUX”.
Regarding claims 5 and 14, SEVIN teaches, The apparatus of claim 1, SEVIN does not explicitly teach but LORGEOUX teaches, ‘wherein the processing circuitry is further configured to recover synchronization with a communication medium after transitioning back to the listening operation.’ (LORGEOUX – Paragraphs [0410]-[0411]: FIG. 10b is similar to FIG. 10a except that an optional synchronization delay 1040 is added before backoff counter restart 1033 on Link 152. This optional synchronization delay reflects the fact that co-affiliated STA A2 122 being in the disabled frame exchange state 1021 during the frame exchange, it may have lost synchronization with the medium. Indeed, STAA2 122 was not able to sense Link 152 during the UL transmission 1025 of STA A1 121 on Link 151. This optional synchronization delay thus allows co-affiliated STA A2 122, having switched back from the disabled frame exchange state 1021 to the listening operation state 1011, to resynchronize on the medium before restarting any new EDCA procedure to contend for access to Link 152. In other words, in these embodiments, the restart strategy includes a synchronization delay from the end of the frame exchange, before restarting the backoff counter; Paragraph [0416]: In the scenario of FIG. 10b, co-affiliated STA A2 122 may be considered as resynchronized to the medium either upon successful reception of an 802.11 Control frame, or once the MediumSyncDelay timer expires. The next decrement of its backoff counters can then be started).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to have known to combine the teachings of LORGEOUX with SEVIN because both are in the same/similar field of endeavor. The advantage of incorporating the above limitation(s) of LORGEOUX into SEVIN is that LORGEOUX provides a medium resynchronization mechanism addressing the problem that STAs returning to listening mode from this blindness state lose channel awareness, and provides the solution of running a medium resynchronization procedure (or waiting out a synchronization delay) to realign channel state parameters before contending for the medium. This avoids channel collisions caused by premature transmissions on a medium whose NAV and occupancy status where unmonitored during the blindness state (See paragraphs [0410]-[0411], [0416], LORGEOUX).
Regarding claims 6 and 15, SEVIN teaches, The apparatus of claim 1, SEVIN does not explicitly teach but LORGEOUX teaches, ‘wherein the processing circuitry is further configured to wait a predetermined period of time or transmit a control’ (LORGEOUX – Paragraph [0411]: This optional synchronization delay thus allows co-affiliated STA A2 122, having switched back from the disabled frame exchange state 1021 to the listening operation state 1011, to resynchronize on the medium before restarting any new EDCA procedure to contend for access to Link 152. In other words, in these embodiments, the restart strategy includes a synchronization delay from the end of the frame exchange, before restarting the backoff counter; Paragraph [0414]: In practice, if a synchronization loss occurred, the restart of the backoff counters for Link 152 is frozen: a timer called MediumSyncDelay in the IEEE P802.11 be/D1.5 draft and initialized with the Medium Synchronization Information field value is started by STA A2 122 immediately after the switch back (step 950) to the listening operation state 1011. The timer is counted down, and upon expiry, the backoff counters for Link 152 are started (decremented))
‘or test frame to recover synchronization with a communication medium.’ (LORGEOUX – Paragraphs [0315]-[0317]: In a second implementation, the non-AP MLD is not able to operate a CCA during the transition period, i.e. while switching. In such a case, the switch mechanism 622b (resp. 623b in the Figure) is launched after the backoff counter reaches zero… Because a risk exists that the medium be in demand by other MLDs, there is an interest to protect the medium during the transition period starting at the expiry of the backoff counter. In that respect, a protection frame 629 as a RTS (Request To Send) or a CTS-to-self (Clear To Send) frame is transmitted by the transmitting EMLSR co-affiliated STA A1 121 during the switch procedure 622b, before the transmission of the buffered uplink data 624 is actually performed. In other words, it is provided that responsive to the backoff counter reaching the value of 0, the non-AP MLD transmits a control frame over the link corresponding to the backoff counter).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to have known to combine the teachings of LORGEOUX with SEVIN because both are in the same/similar field of endeavor. The advantage of incorporating the above limitation(s) of LORGEOUX into SEVIN is that LORGEOUX provides a medium resynchronization mechanism addressing the problem that STAs returning to listening mode from this blindness state lose channel awareness, and provides the solution of running a medium resynchronization procedure (or waiting out a synchronization delay) to realign channel state parameters before contending for the medium. This avoids channel collisions caused by premature transmissions on a medium whose NAV and occupancy status where unmonitored during the blindness state (See paragraphs [0410]-[0411], [0416], LORGEOUX).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to HAESHIL J CHOI whose telephone number is (703)756-5409. The examiner can normally be reached Monday thru Friday ET.
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 on 571-270-3936. 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.
/HAESHIL JESSICA CHOI/Examiner, Art Unit 2479
/JAE Y LEE/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2479
Prosecution Insights