DETAILED ACTION
This office action is a response to 3/2/2026.
Claims 1-7, 14, and 16-18 are pending.
Claims 1-2, 4-7, 14, 16, and 18 are rejected.
Claims 3 and 17 are objected to.
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 .
Election/Restrictions
Applicant’s election without traverse of invention I corresponding to claims 1-7, 14, and 16-18 in the reply filed on 3/2/2026 is acknowledged. Invention II corresponding to claims 8-13 and 19-21 are withdrawn from further consideration.
Priority
Acknowledgment is made of applicant’s claim for foreign priority under 35 U.S.C. 119 (a)-(d). The certified copy has been filed in the Instant application.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 4/8/2024 and 10/11/2024 are in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
Specification
The title of the invention is not descriptive. A new title is required that is clearly indicative of the invention to which the claims are directed.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 4-5 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Claim 4 recites the limitation "the first interference limit" in line 3 and the limitation “the transmission link” in line 4. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 5 is rejected by the virtue its dependency on claim 4.
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.
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.
Claims 1-2, 6-7, 14, 16, and 18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Seok et al. US 20210314879 A1, hereinafter Seok, in view of Alizadeh et al. US 20220225325 A1, hereinafter Alizadeh.
Regarding Claim 1, Seok discloses a communication method (Seok [0002] methods for spatial reuse in a wireless network), comprising:
selecting, by a sharing access point (AP) (Seok Fig. 2 and [0049] the sharing AP), a first beam width for scheduling a sharing station (STA) during coordinated transmission, wherein the first beam width is one of at least two adjustable beam widths of the sharing AP; and
sending, by the sharing AP, a coordinated transmission notification to a shared AP, wherein the coordinated transmission notification comprises a coordinated transmission parameter (Seok at least [0073] discloses that the first wireless AP, the sharing AP, transmits a frame (e.g., control or announcement frame) including the transmit power information to the second wireless AP, the shared AP),
wherein the coordinated transmission parameter is obtained based on the sharing STA and the first beam width,
wherein the coordinated transmission notification instructs the shared AP to select, based on the coordinated transmission parameter, a shared STA and a second beam width that are to be used for coordinated transmission (Seok at least [0073] discloses that the second wireless AP, the shared AP, can transmit data using the information indicated in the announcement frame and can schedule transmissions from an associated wireless STAs), and
wherein the second beam width is an adjustable beam width of the shared AP.
Seok fails to explicitly disclose selecting, by a sharing access point (AP), a first beam width for scheduling a sharing station (STA) during coordinated transmission, wherein the first beam width is one of at least two adjustable beam widths of the sharing AP; and
sending, by the sharing AP, a coordinated transmission notification to a shared AP, wherein the coordinated transmission notification comprises a coordinated transmission parameter,
wherein the coordinated transmission parameter is obtained based on the sharing STA and the first beam width,
wherein the coordinated transmission notification instructs the shared AP to select, based on the coordinated transmission parameter, a shared STA and a second beam width that are to be used for coordinated transmission, and
wherein the second beam width is an adjustable beam width of the shared AP.
However, in the same field of endeavor, Alizadeh more specifically discloses selecting, by a sharing access point (AP), a first beam width for scheduling a sharing station (STA) during coordinated transmission, wherein the first beam width is one of at least two adjustable beam widths of the sharing AP (Alizadeh at least [0027] discloses a centralized scheduler (e.g., a master AP) that coordinates transmissions; [0058] discloses components that can change the coverage area by manipulating the beamwidth of the antenna to fit the needs of the transmission; the client beam determiner 326 can modify the size of the coverage area in relation to the client stations); and
sending, by the sharing AP, a coordinated transmission notification to a shared AP, wherein the coordinated transmission notification comprises a coordinated transmission parameter,
wherein the coordinated transmission parameter is obtained based on the sharing STA and the first beam width (Alizadeh at least Fig. 3C and [0055, 0059-0060] discloses APs including component 321; the AP coordinator 330 can coordinate with the other APs, triggering changes to operation with a narrow antenna beam operation or into changes of the coverage areas),
wherein the coordinated transmission notification instructs the shared AP to select, based on the coordinated transmission parameter, a shared STA and a second beam width that are to be used for coordinated transmission, and
wherein the second beam width is an adjustable beam width of the shared AP (Alizadeh at least Fig. 3C and [0055, 0059-0060] discloses APs including component 321; the AP coordinator 330 can coordinate with the other APs, triggering changes to operation with a narrow antenna beam operation or into changes of the coverage areas).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the configuration of transmission power of Seok with the configuration of beamwidth of Alizadeh for high-channel reuse in high-density applications as switchable beam directions allow flexibility in aligning cells in adjoining coverage areas.
Regarding Claim 2, Seok in view of Alizadeh discloses the method of claim 1. In the obvious combination, Seok further discloses wherein the coordinated transmission parameter comprises at least two of the first beam width, an identifier of the sharing STA, or a first interference limit, and wherein the first interference limit indicates a maximum tolerable interference to a transmission link between the sharing AP and the sharing STA at the first beam width (Seok at least [0052-0053, 0056] discloses the sharing AP compiling an SIR table including each associated STAs; the SIR table can be used to determine a C-SR tolerable maximum interference signal strength for signals causing interference that effects a sharing AP; at least [0061, 0068] discloses constraints indicated in a C-SR announcement frame).
Regarding Claim 6, Seok in view of Alizadeh discloses the method of claim 1. In the obvious combination, Alizadeh further discloses wherein the sharing AP has a different coverage at different beam widths, and wherein each coverage is formed on a horizontal plane (Alizadeh at least [0058] discloses, as shown in Fig. 1, the coverage area may be steered in one or more planes depending on the operation of the antenna and the needs of the uplink operation).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the configuration of transmission power of Seok with the configuration of beamwidth of Alizadeh for high-channel reuse in high-density applications as switchable beam directions allow flexibility in aligning cells in adjoining coverage areas.
Regarding Claim 7, Seok in view of Alizadeh discloses the method of claim 1. In the obvious combination, Seok further discloses further comprising:
receiving, by the sharing AP, at least one of a first signal from an associated STA of the sharing AP, a second signal from the associated STA of the shared AP, or a third signal with the at least two beam widths from the shared AP; and obtaining the channel measurement information using at least one of the first signal, the second signal, or the third signal (Seok at least [0050-0054] discloses compiling an interference measurement report; the sharing AP and the requested shared AP(s) measure the RSSI; here, STA11 and STA12 are associated with AP1 and STA21 and STA22 are associated with AP2).
Claims 14, 16, and 18 are rejected on the same grounds set forth in the rejection of claims 1, 2, and 7, respectively. Claims 14, 16, and 18 recite similar features as in claims 1, 2, and 7, respectively, from the perspective of an apparatus (Seok see at least Fig. 12: wireless device 1200).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 3 and 17 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.
Claims 4-5 would be allowable if rewritten to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), 2nd paragraph, set forth in this Office action and to include all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Gordaychik US 20210058936 A1
Shafin et al. US 20220408355 A1
Ciochina et al. US 20230009996 A1
Han et al. US 20210400717 A1
Kulkarni et al. US 20230119710 A1
Kanaya et al. US 20230422179 A1
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to YEWON KIM whose telephone number is (571)272-6524. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 8:00 AM - 4:00 PM.
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, GARY MUI can be reached at (571)270-1420. 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.
/Y.K./Examiner, Art Unit 2465
/GARY MUI/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2465
Prosecution Insights