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 .
Response to Arguments/Amendments
Applicant's arguments filed 3/12/26 stating CHITRAKAR is disqualified as a prior was persuasive. Therefore, the previous 103 rejection have been withdrawn. However, upon further consideration, new ground rejection has been made as shown below.
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.
Claims 21-23, 33 and 35-40 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over CHITRAKAR (US 20240098712 A1) in view of D1 (LIWEN CHU(NXP) "Low Latency Support", IEEE 802.11-20/1058r1, IEEE DRAFT,11-20-1058-01-OOBE-LOW-LATENCY-SUPPORT, October 14,2020, NPL dated 6/25/24, 10 pages).
For claim 21, CHITRAKAR discloses a wireless communication method, applied in a Non-Access-Point Multi-Link Device (Non-AP MLD) comprising at least a first Station (STA) and a second STA, the first STA forming a first link with a first Access Point (AP) in an Access Point Multi-Link Device (AP MLD) associated with the first STA, and the second STA forming a second link with a second AP in the AP MLD (FIG. 2, the system 200 comprising a first STA1-1 that is associated with AP1, and a second STA STA2-1 that is associated with AP2), the method comprising:
performing, by the Non-AP MLD, data transmission on the first link and the second link (FIGs. 2-34 and associated text, such as “[0061] APs can negotiate the following parameters for the Coordinated SPs: … [0066] Characteristics of traffic that is expected to be exchanged during the SPs (data rate, burst size, delay bound etc.) …”).
CHITRAKAR is silent but D1, in the same field of endeavor of wireless communication specified by IEEE, discloses: when a first Low Latency Target Wake Time Service Period (LL TWT SP) is established on the first link (slide 2, 1st bullet, “An AP indicates whether a TWT SP is used for low latency service or not. - A TWT SP for low latency service only allows the STAs that support/request low latency service to join the TWT SP”), and in a case that a second LL TWT SP is established on the second link (slide 2, 1st bullet; apply the teaching to the second link), the first LL TWT SP and the second LL TWT SP completely overlap in a time domain (Slide 4, 1st bullet “The TXOP of the OBSS traffic may overlap with the low latency TWT SP.”). OOSA would have been motivated to apply the teaching of D1 above to the first link by CHITRAKAR to yield a predictable result of providing low latency service.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to OOSA before the effective filing date of the application to combine CHITRAKAR and D1 for the benefit of providing low latency service (slide 2 of D1).
Claim 37 is rejected because it is a claim of a station device that performs the method of claim 21 and has the same subject matter as claim 21.
Claim 40 is rejected because it is a claim of an access point device that performs the method of claim 21 and has the same subject matter as claim 21.
As to claims 22 and 38, CHITRAKAR in view of D1 discloses claims 21 and 37, D1 further discloses: wherein the second LL TWT SP is established on the second link (applying the same procedure on the first link disclosed by the parent claim to the second link), and the first LL TWT SP and the second LL TWT SP completely overlapping in the time domain comprises: the first LL TWT SP and the second LL TWT SP having same start time and end time and having a same LL TWT parameter (Slide 4, 1st bullet “The TXOP of the OBSS traffic may overlap with the low latency TWT SP.”; note that by definition, overlap suggests same start time and end time and having a same interval length).
As to claim 23, CHITRAKAR in view of D1 discloses claim 22, D1 further discloses: wherein in the case that the second LL TWT SP is established on the second link, said performing, by the Non-AP MLD, the data transmission on the first link and the second link comprises: (the selections are considered based on design incentives or requirements according to 2143(F) and would have been obvious to OOSA), and
performing, by the Non-AP MLD when the first link and the second link of the Non-AP MLD belong to a Non Simultaneous Transmit and Receive (NSTR) link pair, the data transmission on the first link and the second link based on an active/passive mode on the first link and the second link (slide 4, last bullet “If the group accepts the rules that within the BSS an EHT STA stops its TXOP at the beginning of the low-latency TWT SP in the link where the TWT is negotiated, the TXOP in other links of NSTR non-AP MLD, EMLSR MLD, EMLMR MLD should be considered also (see the following slides) and the TWT SP should be broadcast TWT SP. …”).
As to claim 33, CHITRAKAR in view of D1 discloses claim 23, CHITRAKAR further discloses: wherein the mode of the first link and/or the second link is determined based on a predetermined condition (FIGs. 2-34 and associated text, such as “[0061] APs can negotiate the following parameters for the Coordinated SPs: … [0066] Characteristics of traffic that is expected to be exchanged during the SPs (data rate, burst size, delay bound etc.) …”).
As to claim 35, CHITRAKAR in view of D1 discloses claim 33, D1 further discloses: wherein the predetermined condition is agreed in a protocol, or the predetermined condition is agreed by the first AP and the second AP. The motivation of combining CHITRAKAR and D1 is the same as stated in the parent claim.
As to claim 36, CHITRAKAR in view of D1 discloses claim 23, D1 further discloses: wherein the mode of the first link and/or the second link is determined based on the priorities of the services transmitted in the first LL TWT SP and the second LL TWT SP (as disclosed by the parent claims). The motivation of combining CHITRAKAR and D1 is the same as stated in the parent claim.
As to claim 39, CHITRAKAR in view of D1 discloses claim 38, D1 further discloses: wherein in the case that the second LL TWT SP is established on the second link, said performing, by the Non-AP MLD, the data transmission on the first link and the second link comprises: performing, by the Non-AP MLD when the first link and the second link of the Non-AP MLD belong to a Non Simultaneous Transmit and Receive (NSTR) link pair, the data transmission on the first link and the second link based on an active/passive mode on the first link and the second link (slide 4, last bullet “If the group accepts the rules that within the BSS an EHT STA stops its TXOP at the beginning of the low-latency TWT SP in the link where the TWT is negotiated, the TXOP in other links of NSTR non-AP MLD, EMLSR MLD, EMLMR MLD should be considered also (see the following slides) and the TWT SP should be broadcast TWT SP. …”). The motivation of combining CHITRAKAR and D1 is the same as stated in the parent claim.
Claims 24-32 and 34 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over CHITRAKAR (US 20230319922) in view of D1, further in view of Cariou (US 20210337475 A1).
As to claim 24, CHITRAKAR in view of D1 discloses claim 23, D1 further discloses wherein in the case that the second LL TWT SP is established on the second link (as disclosed by the parent claim):
in a region where the second LL TWT SP completely overlaps the first LL TWT SP in the time domain, or in a region where the first LL TWT SP completely overlaps the second LL TWT SP in the time domain (Slide 4, 1st bullet “The TXOP of the OBSS traffic may overlap with the low latency TWT SP.”).
CHITRAKAR in view of D1 is silent but Cariou, in the same field endeavor of multi-link communication, discloses: when one link is in the leader transmission mode for data transceiving and another link is in the follower transmission mode not/stop performing data transceiving (“[0112] The examples described below adapt the APSD power management scheme to a multi-band framework. The behavior of the scheme linked to the TIM and DTIM in beacons is also adapted. In one example, a STA and an AP can communicate over multiple bands (example, one a primary, power save mode band, or control channel band, and a secondary, active mode band, or data channel band)”). OOSA would have been motivated to apply the teaching of Cariou above to the multi-link communication by CHITRAKAR in view of D1 to yield a predictable result of performing power management.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to OOSA before the effective filing date of the application to combine CHITRAKAR in view of D1 and Cariou for the benefit of performing power management ([0112] of Cariou).
As to claim 25, CHITRAKAR in view of D1 discloses claim 23, and is silent but Cariou, in the same field endeavor of multi-link communication, discloses: wherein the active/passive mode of the first link is controlled by the first AP and/or the first STA, and/or the active/passive mode of the second link is controlled by the second AP and/or the second STA (“[0112] The examples described below adapt the APSD power management scheme to a multi-band framework. The behavior of the scheme linked to the TIM and DTIM in beacons is also adapted. In one example, a STA and an AP can communicate over multiple bands (example, one a primary, power save mode band, or control channel band, and a secondary, active mode band, or data channel band)”). OOSA would have been motivated to apply the teaching of Cariou above to the multi-link communication by CHITRAKAR in view of D1 to yield a predictable result of performing power management.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to OOSA before the effective filing date of the application to combine CHITRAKAR in view of D1 and Cariou for the benefit of performing power management ([0112] of Cariou).
As to claim 26, CHITRAKAR in view of D1 discloses claim 23, and is silent but Cariou, in the same field endeavor of multi-link communication, discloses: the active/passive mode of the second link is controlled by the second AP instructing the second STA via a trigger frame or a management frame (“[0112] The examples described below adapt the APSD power management scheme to a multi-band framework. The behavior of the scheme linked to the TIM and DTIM in beacons is also adapted. In one example, a STA and an AP can communicate over multiple bands (example, one a primary, power save mode band, or control channel band, and a secondary, active mode band, or data channel band)”). OOSA would have been motivated to apply the teaching of Cariou above to the multi-link communication by CHITRAKAR in view of D1 to yield a predictable result of performing power management.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to OOSA before the effective filing date of the application to combine CHITRAKAR in view of D1 and Cariou for the benefit of performing power management ([0112] of Cariou).
As to claim 27, CHITRAKAR in view of D1 discloses claim 23, and is silent but Cariou, in the same field endeavor of multi-link communication, discloses: wherein the active/passive mode of the first link is indicated by a value of a variable in an LL TWT SP module in the first AP, wherein the LL TWT SP module in the first AP comprises first information field and/or second information field, a value of a variable in the first information field indicates whether to enable the active/passive mode, and a value of a variable in the second information field indicates whether the first link is in the leader transmission mode or the follower transmission mode (FIG. 4 and the associated text, such as such as “[0052] Although states 402, 404, 406, and 408 are shown as separate states, … [0053] The materials above describe a protocol for negotiation of multi-band link aggregation setup. The materials that follow describe several examples that enable multi-band power savings by modifying the initial setup protocol to include pre-negotiated power save states/operating modes. These negotiations enable fast switching between or among pre-defined power save modes of operation …” and
“[0112] The examples described below adapt the APSD power management scheme to a multi-band framework. The behavior of the scheme linked to the TIM and DTIM in beacons is also adapted. In one example, a STA and an AP can communicate over multiple bands (example, one a primary, power save mode band, or control channel band, and a secondary, active mode band, or data channel band)” in view of the parent claim; note that first information field and/or second information field are variables related changing of operation modes). OOSA would have been motivated to apply the teaching of Cariou above to the multi-link communication by CHITRAKAR in view of D1 to yield a predictable result of performing power management.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to OOSA before the effective filing date of the application to combine CHITRAKAR in view of D1 and Cariou for the benefit of performing power management ([0112] of Cariou).
As to claim 28, CHITRAKAR in view of D1 discloses claim 23, and is silent but Cariou, in the same field endeavor of multi-link communication, discloses: wherein the active/passive mode of the first link is indicated by a value of a variable in an LL TWT SP module in the first STA, wherein the LL TWT SP module in the first STA comprises third information field and/or fourth information field, a value of a variable in the third information field indicates whether to enable the active/passive mode, and a value of a variable in the fourth information field indicates whether the first link is in the leader transmission mode or the follower transmission mode (FIG. 4 and the associated text, such as such as “[0052] Although states 402, 404, 406, and 408 are shown as separate states, … [0053] The materials above describe a protocol for negotiation of multi-band link aggregation setup. The materials that follow describe several examples that enable multi-band power savings by modifying the initial setup protocol to include pre-negotiated power save states/operating modes. These negotiations enable fast switching between or among pre-defined power save modes of operation …” and “[0112] The examples described below adapt the APSD power management scheme to a multi-band framework. The behavior of the scheme linked to the TIM and DTIM in beacons is also adapted. In one example, a STA and an AP can communicate over multiple bands (example, one a primary, power save mode band, or control channel band, and a secondary, active mode band, or data channel band)” in view of the parent claim; note that third information field and/or fourth information field are variables related changing of operation modes). OOSA would have been motivated to apply the teaching of Cariou above to the multi-link communication by CHITRAKAR in view of D1 to yield a predictable result of performing power management.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to OOSA before the effective filing date of the application to combine CHITRAKAR in view of D1 and Cariou for the benefit of performing power management ([0112] of Cariou).
As to claim 29, CHITRAKAR in view of D1 discloses claim 23, and is silent but Cariou, in the same field endeavor of multi-link communication, discloses: wherein the active/passive mode of the second link is indicated by a value of a variable in an LL TWT SP module in the second AP, wherein the LL TWT SP module in the second AP comprises fifth information field and/or sixth information field, a value of a variable in the fifth information field indicates whether to enable the active/passive mode, and a value of a variable in the sixth information field indicates whether the second link is in the leader transmission mode or the follower transmission mode (FIG. 4 and the associated text, such as such as “[0052] Although states 402, 404, 406, and 408 are shown as separate states, … [0053] The materials above describe a protocol for negotiation of multi-band link aggregation setup. The materials that follow describe several examples that enable multi-band power savings by modifying the initial setup protocol to include pre-negotiated power save states/operating modes. These negotiations enable fast switching between or among pre-defined power save modes of operation …” and “[0112] The examples described below adapt the APSD power management scheme to a multi-band framework. The behavior of the scheme linked to the TIM and DTIM in beacons is also adapted. In one example, a STA and an AP can communicate over multiple bands (example, one a primary, power save mode band, or control channel band, and a secondary, active mode band, or data channel band)” in view of the parent claim in view of the parent claim; note that fifth information field and/or sixth information field are variables related changing of operation modes). OOSA would have been motivated to apply the teaching of Cariou above to the multi-link communication by CHITRAKAR in view of D1 to yield a predictable result of performing power management.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to OOSA before the effective filing date of the application to combine CHITRAKAR in view of D1 and Cariou for the benefit of performing power management ([0112] of Cariou).
As to claim 30, CHITRAKAR in view of D1 discloses claim 23, and is silent but Cariou, in the same field endeavor of multi-link communication, discloses: wherein the active/passive mode of the second link is indicated by a value of a variable in an LL TWT SP module in the second STA, wherein the LL TWT SP module in the second STA comprises seventh information field and/or eighth information field, a value of a variable in the seventh information field indicates whether to enable the active/passive mode, and a value of a variable in the eighth information field indicates whether the second link is in the leader transmission mode or the follower transmission mode (FIG. 4 and the associated text, such as such as “[0052] Although states 402, 404, 406, and 408 are shown as separate states, … [0053] The materials above describe a protocol for negotiation of multi-band link aggregation setup. The materials that follow describe several examples that enable multi-band power savings by modifying the initial setup protocol to include pre-negotiated power save states/operating modes. These negotiations enable fast switching between or among pre-defined power save modes of operation …” and “[0112] The examples described below adapt the APSD power management scheme to a multi-band framework. The behavior of the scheme linked to the TIM and DTIM in beacons is also adapted. In one example, a STA and an AP can communicate over multiple bands (example, one a primary, power save mode band, or control channel band, and a secondary, active mode band, or data channel band)” in view of the parent claim in view of the parent claim; note that seventh information field and/or eighth information field are variables related changing of operation modes). OOSA would have been motivated to apply the teaching of Cariou above to the multi-link communication by CHITRAKAR in view of D1 to yield a predictable result of performing power management.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to OOSA before the effective filing date of the application to combine CHITRAKAR in view of D1 and Cariou for the benefit of performing power management ([0112] of Cariou).
As to claim 31, CHITRAKAR in view of D1 discloses claim 23, CHITRAKAR further discloses: receiving, by the Non-AP MLD, first indication information transmitted by the first AP or the second AP via a trigger frame or a management frame, the first indication information indicating a mode of the first link (“[0075] … The Multi-AP Trigger frame 802 instructs AP1 to initiate an UL transmission from STA2 and also assigns RU1 to be used for the UL transmission from STA2).
CHITRAKAR in view of D1 is silent but Cariou, in the same field endeavor of multi-link communication, discloses: setting, by the Non-AP MLD, the active/passive mode of the first link based on the first indication information (FIG. 11 and the associated text, such as [0048] … Alternatively, the transition from state 404 to state 406 can be triggered by a specific trigger frame (similar to the LA setup frame but with specific trigger information). The transition from state 404 to 406 can also be triggered by a specific timeout, or by a specific event.”); the mode is the active/passive mode (“[0112] The examples described below adapt the APSD power management scheme to a multi-band framework. The behavior of the scheme linked to the TIM and DTIM in beacons is also adapted. In one example, a STA and an AP can communicate over multiple bands (example, one a primary, power save mode band, or control channel band, and a secondary, active mode band, or data channel band)” in view of the parent claim in view of the parent claim; note that seventh information field and/or eighth information field are variables related changing of operation modes). OOSA would have been motivated to apply the teaching of Cariou above to the multi-link communication by CHITRAKAR in view of D1 to yield a predictable result of performing power management.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to OOSA before the effective filing date of the application to combine CHITRAKAR in view of D1 and Cariou for the benefit of performing power management ([0112] of Cariou).
As to claim 32, CHITRAKAR in view of D1 and Cariou discloses claim 31, D1 further discloses: wherein the mode of the first link is determined based on at least one of a priority of a service transmitted in the first LL TWT SP, a priority of a service transmitted in the second LL TWT SP, start time of the first LL TWT SP, start time of the second LL TWT SP, link state information of the first link, or link state information of the second link (slide 2, 1st bullet, “An AP indicates whether a TWT SP is used for low latency service or not. - A TWT SP for low latency service only allows the STAs that support/request low latency service to join the TWT SP”). The motivation of combining CHITRAKAR in view of D1 and Cariou is the same as stated in the parent claims.
As to claim 34, CHITRAKAR in view of D1 discloses claim 33: wherein the predetermined condition comprises: when the priority of the service transmitted in the first LL TWT SP is lower than the priority of the service transmitted in the second LL TWT SP, the first link is in the follower transmission mode and the second link is in the leader transmission mode (using a link with higher priority is well known in the art. Examiner takes an official notice on this statement. Applicant does not challenge the official notice, therefore, the statement is considered as an admitted prior art);
when the priority of the service transmitted in the first LL TWT SP is higher than the priority of the service transmitted in the second LL TWT SP, the first link is in the leader transmission mode and the second link is in the follower transmission mode (using a link with higher priority is well known in the art. Examiner takes an official notice on this statement. Applicant does not challenge the official notice, therefore, the statement is considered as an admitted prior art);
when the priority of the service transmitted in the first LL TWT SP is same as the priority of the service transmitted in the second LL TWT SP, and the start time of the first LL TWT SP is later than the start time of the second LL TWT SP, the first link is in the follower transmission mode and the second link is in the leader transmission mode (This is obvious to OOSA because it is an obvious try according to MPEP 2143(E)); or
when the priority of the service transmitted in the first LL TWT SP is same as the priority of the service transmitted in the second LL TWT SP, and the start time of the first LL TWT SP is earlier than the start time of the second LL TWT SP (as disclosed by the parent claims).
CHITRAKAR in view of D1 is silent but Cariou, in the same field endeavor of multi-link communication, discloses: the first link is in the leader transmission mode and the second link is in the follower transmission mode (“[0112] The examples described below adapt the APSD power management scheme to a multi-band framework. The behavior of the scheme linked to the TIM and DTIM in beacons is also adapted. In one example, a STA and an AP can communicate over multiple bands (example, one a primary, power save mode band, or control channel band, and a secondary, active mode band, or data channel band)” in view of the parent claim in view of the parent claim; note that seventh information field and/or eighth information field are variables related changing of operation modes). OOSA would have been motivated to apply the teaching of Cariou above to the multi-link communication by CHITRAKAR in view of D1 to yield a predictable result of performing power management.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to OOSA before the effective filing date of the application to combine CHITRAKAR in view of D1 and Cariou for the benefit of performing power management ([0112] of Cariou).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JIANYE WU whose telephone number is (571)270-1665. The examiner can normally be reached M-TH 8am-6pm.
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, Yemane Mesfin can be reached at (571) 272-3927. 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.
/JIANYE WU/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2462
Prosecution Insights