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 .
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on 07/21/26 has been entered.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
(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) 22-29 and 31-32 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Cariou et al. (US 2022/0159555 A1, hereinafter “Cariou”)
Regarding claim 22, Cariou discloses a wireless multi-link device (MLD) comprising: one or more wireless transceivers; and one or more controllers operably coupled to the one or more wireless transceivers (see Figure 1),
wherein the one or more controllers are arranged to: generate a beacon including a Reduced Neighbor Report (RNR), wherein the RNR announces a mm Wave access point (AP) affiliated with the wireless MLD (see para. 0218, 0220, 0228, RNR in beacon response with AP affiliation);
transmit the beacon over a non-mmWave link via the one or more wireless
transceivers (see para. 0228, 0235, probe transmitted by sub-7 GHZ AP); receive a Multi-Link (ML) probe request from a second wireless MLD (see para. 0165, 0235, probe request from non-AP MLD);
transmit a probe response to the second wireless MLD, the probe response
including full mmWave link information for a mm Wave link between the wireless MLD
and the second wireless MLD (see para. 0166, probe response with beacon elements; para. 0240, multi-link element with per STA profile for each link; para. 0268, probe response with beacon elements; para. 0222-0223, basic variant multi-link element); generate a unicast frame (see para. 0252, beacon may be unicasted) including first control or management information relating to the mmWave link between the mmWave AP and the second wireless MLD (see para. 0223, basic variant multi-link; 0246, ML element; para. 0268, beacon elements), wherein the first control or management information does not include information used for link establishment (see para. 0174, mmwave information only); and transmit the unicast frame over the mmWave link via the one or more wireless transceivers (see para. 0225 and 0252, beacon in unicast manner).
Regarding claim 23, Cariou discloses wherein the one or more controllers are further arranged to: generate a broadcast frame including second control or management information relating to the mWave link, wherein the second control or management information includes information used for link establishment; and transmit the broadcast frame over a non-mmWave link via the one or more wireless transceivers (see para. 0246, beamforming training with a dedicated broadcast of TWT).
Regarding claim 24, Cariou discloses wherein the second control or management information includes at least one of BSS color change information or channel switch information (see para. 0218, BSS parameter).
Regarding claim 25, Cariou discloses wherein the information used for link establishment includes at least one of association information or sounding information (see para. 0180, 0209-0210, 0236, 0239-0240, association request with multi-link element).
Regarding claim 26, Cariou discloses wherein the first control or management information includes power management information (see para. 0225-0226, TWT schedules).
Regarding claim 27, Cariou discloses wherein the beacon is transmitted by a transmitted Basic Service Set Identifier (BSSID) AP of the wireless MLD, and wherein the mm Wave AP is affiliated with a non-transmitted BSSID AP of the wireless MLD (see para. 0218, BSSID).
Regarding claim 28, Cariou discloses wherein the beacon and the probe response are transmitted over the same non-mmWave link (see para. 0165, probe response over sub-a0 ghz channel).
Regarding claim 29, Cariou discloses wherein the wireless MLD comprises an access point (AP) MLD including a wireless AP, and wherein the second wireless MLD comprises a non- AP MLD that includes a non-AP station (STA) (see Figure 3, para. 0119-0121).
Regarding claim 31, Cariou discloses wherein the non-mmWave link comprises a 2.4 Gigahertz (GHz) link, a 5 GHz link, or a 6 GHz link, and wherein the wireless MLD is compatible with an Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers (IEEE) 802.11 protocol (see para. 0016, 0081, 0121, and 0131, IEEE).
Regarding claim 32, Cariou discloses wherein the full mmWave link information for a mmWave link between the mmWave AP and the second wireless MLD includes one or more of a full BSS operating bandwidth (BW) information element (IE), a Channel Switch Announcement (CSA) IE, transmission (Tx) power information, channel puncture information, or a maximum channel switch time IE (see para. 0219, TBTT information field).
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.
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.
Claim(s) 30 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Cariou in view of Chen et al. (US 2023/0354383 A1, hereinafter “Chen”).
Regarding claim 30, Cariou discloses all the subject matter but fails to mention wherein the one or more controllers are further arranged to: transmit a block acknowledgement request (BAR) over the mm Wave link, wherein a responsive block acknowledgement (BA) is required within a short interframe space (SIFS) following reception of the BAR; and receive the responsive BA from the second wireless MLD over the mm Wave link. However, Chen from a similar field of endeavor discloses wherein the one or more controllers are further arranged to: transmit a block acknowledgement request (BAR) over the mm Wave link, wherein a responsive block acknowledgement (BA) is required within a short interframe space (SIFS) following reception of the BAR; and receive the responsive BA from the second wireless MLD over the mm Wave link (see para. 0285, block acknowledgement trigger frame). Thus, it would have been obvious to one ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention was made to include Chen block acknowledgement scheme into Cariou request/response scheme. The method can be implemented in a frame. The motivation of doing this is to save resources.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MOHAMMAD S ANWAR whose telephone number is (571)270-5641. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 6-5 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, Asad Nawaz can be reached at 571-272-3988. 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.
MOHAMMAD S. ANWAR
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 2463
/MOHAMMAD S ANWAR/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2463
Prosecution Insights