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 .
Drawings
The drawings are objected to because:
In Fig. 5, Fig. 10 and Fig. 14, the labels are not clear or legible.
In Fig. 15, the box 1514 has a typographical error (see the following section, namely “Specification”, of this Office Action for the details).
Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
Specification
The disclosure is objected to because of the following informalities:
In the disclosure, ¶81, the steps 1512 and 1514 are disclosing the same functionality, “…sending sensing measurement reports over the first frequency band”. This is also the case with the corresponding Fig. 15. A typographical error is suspected based on ¶9, ¶19, ¶73, and claims 4 and 14. The “first frequency band” is suspected to be intended as “second frequency band” based on the claims.
Appropriate correction is required.
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.
Claim(s) 1-2, 7, 9, 11-13, 15-17, 19-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by HE et al (US 2025/0294378).
Regarding claim 1, 11, HE et al (US 2025/0294378) discloses a method/module comprising:
communicating control messages over a first frequency band (HE: Fig. 9-Fig. 10, Fig. 12, ¶57, ¶145, ¶270, ¶274, the AP SBP responder device communicates control messages with a SBP initiator (non-AP) device; the non-AP SBP initiator device is a low frequency band device, and communicates over a first frequency band/low frequency band with the AP SBP responder device);
performing sensing measurements over a second frequency band (HE: Fig. 9-10, ¶272-273, ¶276, the AP responder device performs sensing over a DMG band which is a high frequency band); and
sending sensing measurement reports over the first frequency band (HE: Fig. 9, 10, Fig. 12, ¶276, ¶295, AP responder device sends reports regarding the sensing measurements based on the sensing performed), wherein the first frequency band and the second frequency band are non-overlapping and the first frequency band is lower than the second frequency band (HE: Fig. 9-Fig. 12, ¶145-146 the frequency band for DMG sensing is a high frequency band in orders of 40+ GHz wherein the first frequency band is of the Sub-7 frequency bands).
Regarding claim 2, 12, HE et al discloses method/module of claim 1/11, wherein performing sensing measurements over the second frequency band comprises performing sensing measurements with one or more sensing devices (HE: Fig. 9, Fig. 10, Fig. 12, ¶267, ¶282, sensing is performed with at least one sensing device).
Regarding claim 7, HE et al discloses method of claim 1, further comprising advertising DMG sensing capability (HE: ¶284, capability of DMG sensing is transmitted to non AP STAs).
Regarding claim 9, 17, HE et al discloses method/module of claim 1/11, wherein the first frequency band is below 8 gigahertz (GHz) and the second frequency band is between 42 GHz and 71 GHz (HE: ¶123-124, first link 2.4 GHz/5GHz, second link 60 GHz).
Regarding claim 13, HE et al discloses module of claim 11, wherein the first frequency band transceiver is a first affiliated station of an MLD, and the second frequency band transceiver is a second affiliated station of an MLD (HE: Fig. 9-Fig. 10, Fig. 12, ¶124-126, AP station and non-AP station are both MLD devices).
Regarding claim 15, HE discloses module of claim 13, wherein the first communication link is further for protocol exchanges for one or more of:
protected directional multi gigabit (DMG) sensing measurement request, response, report and termination; sensing by proxy DMG request, response, report and termination; and establishing and terminating millimeter wave (mmWave) links (HE: Fig. 10, Fig. 12, ¶282, ¶285, ¶298 the establishing and termination of the mmWave/DMG frequency links and proxy DMG request, response, termination; this is performed over the Sub-7 link (first link) between the STA1 and the AP).
Regarding claim 16, HE module of claim 13, wherein the second communication link is further for protocol exchanges for one or more of: messages during sounding; and null data packets and long training fields (HE: Fig. 10, Fig. 12, processes 0-5, measurement signals instances ¶60-65, NDP, ¶105, the measurement signals are sounding signals).
Regarding claim 19, HE et al discloses module comprising a third frequency band transceiver for communicating control messages and receiving sensing measurement reports (HE: ¶124-126, Fig. 27, Fig. 32-33, a device e.g. AP or non-AP MLD device, includes a transceiver and is communicating control messages (setup/termination/beacon messages) and sensing reports (reports on sensing measurements) ).
Regarding claim 20, HE et al discloses module of claim 19 further comprising a fourth frequency band transceiver, wherein the third frequency band transceiver is a third affiliated station of an MLD, and the fourth frequency radio transceiver is a fourth affiliated station of the MLD (HE: ¶123-126, Fig. 27, Fig. 32-33, a device e.g. AP or non-AP MLD device, with a multiple stations/APs each of the device/transceiver within the MLD device is communicating using a different band).
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.
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) 3-6, 8, 10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over HE et al (US 2025/0294378) in view of CHITRAKAR et al (US 2025/0275002).
Regarding claim 3, HE et al discloses method of claim 1 further comprising:
establishing a first communication link with an initiating device for communicating control messages over the first frequency band (HE: Fig. 10, Fig. 12, ¶284-287, ¶270-273, a first communication link for control messages is established with an SBP initiator device); and
establishing a second communication link with an initiating device for performing sensing measurements over the second frequency band (HE: Fig. 27, ¶474-475, ¶478, ¶480, establishing a second communication link with an initiating device).
HE et al remains silent regarding a second communication link with the initiating device.
However, CHITRAKAR et al (US 2025/0275002) discloses the second communication link establishing is with the initiating device (CHTRAKAR: ¶121-122, Fig. 9, the sensing session/communication link is established between the same non-AP and AP device MLD devices which have the control communication being established).
A person of ordinary skill in the art working with the invention of HE would have been motivated to use the teachings of CHITRAKAR as it provides power saving by keeping links 2 and 3 in power save modes by keeping only one of the multiple links on for control communications (¶130). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to modify invention of HE with teachings of CHITRAKAR in order to improve energy conservation.
Regarding claim 4, HE modified by CHITRAKAR discloses method of claim 3 further comprising sending sensing measurement reports over the second communication link (HE: Fig. 27, ¶489, a sensing report frame is transmitted on the second communication link i.e. a link with DMG non-AP device).
HE modified by CHITRAKAR silent regarding sending sensing measurement reports using the second affiliated station of the MLD.
However, HE’s embodiment of Fig. 27, sends the sensing measurement reports using the second affiliated station of the MLD (HE: Fig. 27, ¶489, a sensing report frame is transmitted on the second communication link i.e. a link with DMG non-AP device).
A person of ordinary skill in the art working with the invention of HE modified by CHITRAKAR would have been motivated to use the teachings of HE’s embodiment of Fig. 27, as it provides reports being communicated over a higher frequency band which increases the chances of reports being communicated in case a lower frequency band becomes congested. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to modify invention of HE modified by CHITRAKAR with teachings of HE’s embodiment of Fig. 27 in order to improve reliability of report/control information which is usually time critical.
Regarding claim 5, HE modified by CHITRAKAR discloses method of claim 3, wherein the first communication link is further for protocol exchanges for one or more of:
protected directional multi gigabit (DMG) sensing measurement request, response, report and termination; sensing by proxy DMG request, response, report and termination; and establishing and terminating millimeter wave (mmWave) links (HE: Fig. 10, Fig. 12, ¶282, ¶285, ¶298 the establishing and termination of the mmWave/DMG frequency links and proxy DMG request, response, termination; this is performed over the Sub-7 link (first link) between the STA1 and the AP).
Regarding claim 6, HE modified by CHITRAKAR discloses method of claim 3, wherein the second communication link is further for protocol exchanges for one or more of: messages during sounding; and null data packets and long training fields (HE: Fig. 10, Fig. 12, processes 0-5, measurement signals instances ¶60-65, NDP, ¶105, the measurement signals are sounding signals).
Regarding claim 8, HE modified by CHITRAKAR discloses method of claim 3, wherein the first communication link is further for communicating DMG management frames (HE: Fig. 10, Fig. 12, ¶282, ¶285, ¶298 the establishing and termination of the mmWave/DMG frequency links and proxy DMG request, response, termination; this is performed over the Sub-7 link (first link) between the STA1 and the AP and carried control information for at least one DMG link).
Regarding claim 10, 18, HE et al method/module of claim 1/13, wherein the control messages and sensing measurements are for a network using an IEEE 802. 11b protocol (HE ¶119, 802.11 b protocol is used for sensing and control messages).
HE remains silent regarding 802.11bf being the protocol, however, CHITRAKAR discloses this in ¶12.
A person of ordinary skill in the art working with the invention of HE would have been motivated to use the teachings of CHITRAKAR as it provides later protocol with higher bandwidths and capabilities (¶3). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to modify invention of HE with teachings of CHITRAKAR in order to future proof and improve performance of the sensing setups.
Claim(s) 14 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over HE et al (US 2025/0294378)
Regarding claim 14, HE et al discloses module of claim 13, wherein the second affiliated station is for communicating over the second frequency band (HE: Fig. 9-10, ¶272-273, ¶276, the AP responder device performs sensing over a DMG band which is a high frequency band).
HE’s embodiment of Fig. 12 and Fig. 10 remains silent regarding sending sensing measurement reports using the second affiliated station of the MLD.
However, HE’s embodiment of Fig. 27, sends the sensing measurement reports using the second affiliated station of the MLD (HE: Fig. 27, ¶489, a sensing report frame is transmitted on the second communication link i.e. a link with DMG non-AP device).
A person of ordinary skill in the art working with the invention of HE’s embodiment of Fig. 12 and Fig. 10 would have been motivated to use the teachings of HE’s embodiment of Fig. 27, as it provides reports being communicated over a higher frequency band which increases the chances of reports being communicated in case a lower frequency band becomes congested. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to modify invention of HE’s embodiment of Fig. 12 and Fig. 10 with teachings of HE’s embodiment of Fig. 27 in order to improve reliability of report/control information which is usually time critical.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Document U discloses identify and describe the basic elements that have been developed in IEEE 802.11 bf to enable Wi-Fi sensing applications in different WLAN scenarios.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to OMER S MIAN whose telephone number is (571)270-7524. The examiner can normally be reached M,T,W,Th: 10a-7p, Fri, 9a-12p.
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, Huy D Vu can be reached at 571-272-3155. 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.
OMER S. MIAN
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 2461
/OMER S MIAN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2461