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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 12 August 2026 AD has been entered.
Response to Arguments and Amendments
Applicant's arguments filed 12 August 2026 AD have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Barriac et al. (US 20160366637 A1) or Barriac
Barriac teaches a device configured to receive packets in a wireless local area network or WLAN configured to dynamically allow or disallow the receiver to switch from receiving one packet before completion of reception of the one packet. In paragraph 0042 of Barriac, Barriac explains,
(See Barriac paragraph 0042, In certain configurations, upon receiving a packet, the STA A 215 may determine the BSSID of the received packet. If the BSSID of the packet does not match the BSSID of the BSS to which the STA A 215 belongs (e.g., the BSS A 211), the STA A 215 may drop the packet. In other words, the STA A 215 may ignore the packet and may not honor the network allocation vector (NAV) of the packet. Particularly, the STA A 215 may choose to transmit another packet on the frequency channel 206 during the NAV of the packet if the transmission is otherwise allowed.)
In other words, Barriac discloses a STA receiving a packet and determining if the BSSID of the packet matches the BSSID of the BSS of the STA. If the BSSID of the packet fails to match the BSSID of the STA, then the STA drops the packet and transmits during the time period allocated for the complete reception of the packet. Interestingly, Barriac shows the STA dynamically allowing the receiving to switch from receiving the packet failing to match the BSSID of the STA to transmitting a packet before the STA completes reception of the packet with the non-matching BSSID. By the STA selecting to ignore the network allocation vector or NAV of packet with non-matching BSSID and transmitting during the NAV of the non-matching BSSID, the STA dynamically allows switching from receiving the non-matching BSSID packet to transmitting a packet before the completion of reception of the non-matching BSSID.
However, Barriac fails to explicitly teach while receiving on packet by the receiver,… ….to receiving another packet.
Mentze (US 20190222519 A1)
Mentze teaches while receiving one packet by the receiver,… ….to receiving another packet as recited in independent claims 1 and 11.
In paragraph 0033, Mentze states,
“…if the group rate limiter 210 were twenty five for each group 208, the first twenty five data packets 204 of the five hundred data packets 204 in a particular incoming data stream 202 may be examined, assigned to group 208.sub.1 and forwarded. After twenty five data packets 204 are assigned to group 208.sub.1, the group rate limiter 210 may be exceeded and the remaining 475 data packets 204 of the incoming data stream 202 may be dropped.”
Interestingly, in the next paragraph 0034, Mentze further explains,
“Subsequently, a new data stream 202 of fifty data packets 204 may be received. The first twenty five data packets 204 may be assigned to group 208.sub.2 and forwarded.”
In other words, Mentze in paragraph 0033 describes receiving 25 packets for a particular group and dropping the remaining packets for the data stream. The network device in paragraph 0034 of Menzte receives an additional 25 packets from a different data stream. Because Menzte teaches receiving packets from a first data stream, dropping packets from the first data stream, and receiving packets from a second data stream, Menzte teaches while receiving one packet by the receiver to receiving another packet as stated in independent claims 1 and 11.
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 1, 2, 4, 11, 12, and 14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Barriac et al. (US 20160366637 A1) or Barriac in view of Mentze (US 20190222519 A1).
Claim 1
Barriac teaches,
A device comprising:
a receiver configured to receive packets in a wireless local area network (WLAN) and
(See Barriac paragraph 0041, ...the STA A 215 belongs to the BSS A 211 and is within the first transmission range 212, the second transmission range 222, and the third transmission range 232. In addition to receiving packets belonging to the BSS A 211,...)
one or more processors configured to:
(See Barriac paragraph 0078, The wireless device 602 may include a processor 604 which controls operation of the wireless device 602.)
dynamically allow or disallow the receiver to switch,…
(See Barriac paragraph 0043, In certain configurations, upon receiving a packet, the STA A 215 may determine a color of the packet. If the color of the packet does not match the color of the BSS to which the STA A 215 belongs (i.e., the BSS A 211), the STA A 215 may drop the packet.)
Shows the STA 215 allowing the receiver to drop the received packet due to the color failing to match the color of the BSS of the STA or BSS A 211
See section of “Response to Arguments and Amendments” for further clarification, support and argument
…from receiving the one packet.. …before completion of reception of the one packet.
(See Barriac paragraph 0042, In certain configurations, upon receiving a packet, the STA A 215 may determine the BSSID of the received packet. If the BSSID of the packet does not match the BSSID of the BSS to which the STA A 215 belongs (e.g., the BSS A 211), the STA A 215 may drop the packet. In other words, the STA A 215 may ignore the packet and may not honor the network allocation vector (NAV) of the packet. Particularly, the STA A 215 may choose to transmit another packet on the frequency channel 206 during the NAV of the packet if the transmission is otherwise allowed.)
Shows the STA receiving a packet, determining if the BSSID of the packet matches the STA’s BSSID, dropping the packet if the BSSID of the STA fails to match the BSSID of the packet, and transmitting a packet during the allocated time period for receiving the non-matching packet
However, Barriac fails to explicitly teach,
…while receiving one packet via the receiver, to receiving another packet.
Nevertheless, Mentze, in the same field of endeavor, teaches,
…while receiving one packet via the receiver, to receiving another packet.
(See Mentze paragraph 0010, the present disclosure may examine the first 50 packets and then drop the next 450 packets to receive another set of packets that are associated with a different flow.)
Shows the receiver receiving 50 packets, dropping 450 packets, and receiving another set of packets
See section of “Response to Arguments and Amendments” for further clarification, support and argument
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling data of the claimed invention to combine a device with a receiver in wireless local area network or WLAN with a processor to allow the receiver to receive a packet, determine to accept or drop the packet, and transmit a different packet before the completion of reception of the packet as disclosed by Barriac with receiving packets and dropping subsequent packet to receive other packets as disclosed by Mentze to increase the efficiency of the system (i.e. to increase the amount of time available to accepting packets).
Claim 2
Barriac teaches,
The device according to claim 1, wherein
the one packet is transmitted from a transmitter in a first basic service set (BSS), and the another packet is transmitted from another transmitter in a BSS different from the first BSS.
(See Barriac paragraph 0041, In addition to receiving packets belonging to the BSS A 211, the STA A 215 may also receive packets belonging to the BSSs B-E 221, 231, 241, 251 transmitted from the access points and stations of those BSSs.)
The motivation to combine Barriac and Mentze in the dependent claim consists of the same motivation as stated in claim 1.
Claim 4
Barriac teaches,
The device according to claim 3, wherein the second packet has a signal strength higher than a signal strength of the first packet, and the fourth packet has a signal strength higher than a signal strength of the third packet.
(See Barriac paragraph 0073, ...the AP A 210 may determine the RSSI of signals received from the AP B 220 in the BSS B 211. The RSSI may be below a threshold, and therefore, the AP A 210 may determine that BSS B 221 is not one of the BSSs to which the STA A 215 needs to defer to. The AP A 210 may also determine the RSSI of signals received from the AP C 230 is above a threshold.)
The motivation to combine Barriac and Mentze in the dependent claim consists of the same motivation as stated in claim 1.
Claim 11
Barriac teaches,
A method comprising: receiving, by
a receiver of a device, packets in a wireless local area network (WLAN);
(See Barriac paragraph 0041, ...the STA A 215 belongs to the BSS A 211 and is within the first transmission range 212, the second transmission range 222, and the third transmission range 232. In addition to receiving packets belonging to the BSS A 211,...)
and dynamically allowing or disallowing, by one or more processors of the device, the receiver to switch,…
(See Barriac paragraph 0043, In certain configurations, upon receiving a packet, the STA A 215 may determine a color of the packet. If the color of the packet does not match the color of the BSS to which the STA A 215 belongs (i.e., the BSS A 211), the STA A 215 may drop the packet.)
Shows the STA 215 allowing the receiver to drop the received packet due to the color failing to match the color of the BSS of the STA or BSS A 211
See section of “Response to Arguments and Amendments” for further clarification, support and argument
(See Barriac paragraph 0078, The wireless device 602 may include a processor 604 which controls operation of the wireless device 602.)
Shows the processor of the device
…from receiving the one packet… …before completion of reception of the one packet.
(See Barriac paragraph 0042, In certain configurations, upon receiving a packet, the STA A 215 may determine the BSSID of the received packet. If the BSSID of the packet does not match the BSSID of the BSS to which the STA A 215 belongs (e.g., the BSS A 211), the STA A 215 may drop the packet. In other words, the STA A 215 may ignore the packet and may not honor the network allocation vector (NAV) of the packet. Particularly, the STA A 215 may choose to transmit another packet on the frequency channel 206 during the NAV of the packet if the transmission is otherwise allowed.)
Shows the STA receiving a packet, determining if the BSSID of the packet matches the STA’s BSSID, dropping the packet if the BSSID of the STA fails to match the BSSID of the packet, and transmitting a packet during the allocated time period for receiving the non-matching packet
However, Barriac fails to explicitly teach,
…while receiving one packet via the receiver, to receiving another packet…
Nevertheless, Mentze, in the same field of endeavor, teaches,
…while receiving one packet via the receiver, to receiving another packet…
(See Mentze paragraph 0010, the present disclosure may examine the first 50 packets and then drop the next 450 packets to receive another set of packets that are associated with a different flow.)
Shows the receiver receiving 50 packets, dropping 450 packets, and receiving another set of packets
See section of “Response to Arguments and Amendments” for further clarification, support and argument
The motivation to combine Barriac and Mentze in the independent claim consists of the same motivation as stated in claim 1.
Claim 12
Barriac teaches limitations of claim 12 as stated in claim 2. The motivation to combine Barriac and Mentze in the dependent claim consists of the same motivation as stated in claim 1.
Claim 14
Barriac teaches limitations of claim 14 as stated in claim 4. The motivation to combine Barriac and Mentze in the dependent claim consists of the same motivation as stated in claim 1.
Claims 3 and 13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Barriac et al. (US 20160366637 A1) or Barriac in view of Mentze (US 20190222519 A1) in further view of Zou (CN 202331735 U).
Claim 3
…responsive to receiving the first signal, disallow the receiver to switch, while receiving via the receiver a first packet from a first transmitter,...
(See Barriac paragraph 0068, ...the STA A 215 may determine whether the packet belongs to the OBSS to be deferred to based on a color of the packet and whether to the color of the packet matches the color of the BSS C, 231, BSS D 241, or BSS E 251. If the color matches, then the STA A 215 may defer transmissions;...)
Shows the STA A 215 deferring transmissions of packets based on a received packet matching a color of a BSS
…responsive to receiving the second signal, allow the receiver to switch, while receiving via the receiver a third packet from the first transmitter,...
(See Barriac paragraph 0042, ...upon receiving a packet, the STA A 215 may determine the BSSID of the received packet. If the BSSID of the packet does not match the BSSID of the BSS to which the STA A 215 belongs (e.g., the BSS A 211), the STA A 215 may drop the packet. In other words, the STA A 215 may ignore the packet and may not honor the network allocation vector (NAV) of the packet. Particularly, the STA A 215 may choose to transmit another packet on the frequency channel 206 during the NAV of the packet if the transmission is otherwise allowed.)
Shows a STA receiving a packet, dropping the packet, and switching to transmitting another packet during the network allocation vector or NAV
...from a second transmitter; and…
...from the second transmitter.
(See Barriac paragraph 0041, In addition to receiving packets belonging to the BSS A 211, the STA A 215 may also receive packets belonging to the BSSs B-E 221, 231, 241, 251 transmitted from the access points and stations of those BSSs.)
Shows receiving different packets from different BSSs
However, Barriac fails to explicitly teach,
...to receiving a second packet...
...to receiving a fourth packet...
Nevertheless, Mentze, in the same field of endeavor, teaches,
...to receiving a second packet...
...to receiving a fourth packet...
(See Mentze paragraph 0010, the present disclosure may examine the first 50 packets and then drop the next 450 packets to receive another set of packets that are associated with a different flow.)
Shows the receiver receiving 50 packets, dropping 450 packets, and receiving another set of packets
The motivation to combine Barriac and Mentze in the dependent claim consists of the same motivation as stated in claim 1.
However, Barriac fails to explicitly teach,
The device according to claim 1, further comprising:
a controller configured to dynamically send a first signal or a second signal to the one or more processors, wherein the one or more processors are configured to:…
Nevertheless, Zou, in the same field of endeavor, teaches,
The device according to claim 1, further comprising:
a controller configured to dynamically send a first signal or a second signal to the one or more processors, wherein the one or more processors are configured to:…
(See Zou Claim 1, ...controller sends signal to the wireless receiving module is connected with the processor, and transmitting the signal to the processor to be processed by said processor,...)
Shows inherit property of a controller sending a first or second signal to a processor
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling data of the claimed invention to combine a device with a receiver in wireless local area network or WLAN with a processor to allow the receiver to receive a packet, determine to accept or drop the packet, and transmit a different packet before the completion of reception of the packet as disclosed by Barriac with a controller sending a signal to a processor as disclosed by Zou to increase the efficiency of the system (i.e. to increase the accuracy of organizing the various signals transmitted to and from a processor).
Claim 13
Barriac teaches limitations of claim 13 as stated in claim 3. However, Barriac fails to explicitly teach limitations of claim 13 as stated in claim 3. Nevertheless, Mentze and Zou, in the same field of endeavor, teach limitations of claim 13 as stated in claim 3. The motivation to combine Barriac, Mentze, and Zou in dependent claim consists of the same motivation as stated in claim 3.
Claims 5 and 15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Barriac et al. (US 20160366637 A1) or Barriac in view of Mentze (US 20190222519 A1) in further view of (JP 2006528470 A) or JP in further view of Sun et al. (US 20200382931 A1) or Sun.
Claim 5
Barriac fails to explicitly teach limitations of claim 5. Nevertheless, JP, in the same field of endeavor, teaches,
The device according to claim 3, wherein the controller is configured to:
determine that the second packet is to be transmitted at a first time from the second transmitter;
(See JP page 3 paragraph 3, ...the node in the communication system 100 determines the duration of transmission of the first transmitter (remote device), and based on the duration and the start time or end time, the start time of the second transmitter...)
Shows determining the start time for transmission for a second transmitter
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling data of the claimed invention to combine a device with a receiver in wireless local area network or WLAN with a processor to allow the receiver to receive a packet, determine to accept or drop the packet, and transmit a different packet before the completion of reception of the packet as disclosed by Barriac with determining the start time of the transmission of a packet as disclosed by JP to increase the efficiency of the system (i.e. to reduce the probability of a collision of packets in transmission window).
Sun, in the same field of endeavor, teaches,
and responsive to the determination, send, before the first time, the first signal to the one or more processors.
(See Sun paragraph 0021, ...when serving as a data transmitting node, each low-power node may start to transmit signals before the start time of its receiving slot (such as at time points t1-Δt or t3-Δt) during the transmitting period TT whose length is longer than the length of the receiving slot (such as equal to Tr+2*Δt), thereby ensuring that data can be received by other data receiving nodes or data relay nodes.)
Shows transmitting signals to data receiving nodes, containing processors, before the determined start time of receiving slot
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling data of the claimed invention to combine a device with a receiver in wireless local area network or WLAN with a processor to allow the receiver to receive a packet, determine to accept or drop the packet, and transmit a different packet before the completion of reception of the packet as disclosed by Barriac with transmitting a signals to data receiving nodes, containing processors, before the start time of a receiving slot as disclosed by Sun to increase the efficiency of the system (i.e. to increase the accuracy of transmitting packets without interference).
Claim 15
Barriac fails to explicitly teach limitations of claim 15 as stated in claim 5. Nevertheless, JP and Sun, in the same field of endeavor, teach limitations of claim 15 as stated in claim 5. The motivation to combine Barriac, Mentze, JP, and Sun in dependent claim consists of the same motivation as stated in claim 5.
Claims 6 and 16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Barriac et al. (US 20160366637 A1) or Barriac in view of Mentze (US 20190222519 A1) in further view of Thota et al. (US 20230108231 A1) or Thota.
Claim 6
Barriac teaches,
The device according to claim 5, wherein at least two of the controller, the receiver, the first transmitter, or the second transmitter communicate with one another using at least…
(See Barriac paragraph 0041, In addition to receiving packets belonging to the BSS A 211, the STA A 215 may also receive packets belonging to the BSSs B-E 221, 231, 241, 251 transmitted from the access points and stations of those BSSs.)
Shows the multiple BSS with multiple access points and multiple transmitters
However, Barriac fails to explicitly to teach,
…one of Universal Asynchronous Receiver-Transmitter (UART)...
Nevertheless, Thota, in the same field of endeavor, teaches,
…one of Universal Asynchronous Receiver-Transmitter (UART)...
(See Thota paragraph 0048, I/O circuits 648 can include circuits that enable communication with the device according to any suitable method, including any of various serial data communication standards/methods including but not limited to: serial digital interface (SDI), universal serial bus (USB), universal asynchronous receiver transmitter (UART), l.sup.2C, or l.sup.2S.)
Shows device of FIG.6 contains a universal asynchronous receiver transmitter or UART
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling data of the claimed invention to combine a device with a receiver in wireless local area network or WLAN with a processor to allow the receiver to receive a packet, determine to accept or drop the packet, and transmit a different packet before the completion of reception of the packet as disclosed by Barriac with circuitry containing a universal asynchronous receiver transmitter or UART as disclosed by Sun to increase the efficiency of the system (i.e. to increase the accuracy of receiving and transmitting packets among transmitters and receivers).
Claim 16
Barriac teaches limitations of claim 16 as stated in claim 6. However, Barriac fails to explicitly teach limitations of claim 16 as stated in claim 6. Nevertheless, Thota, in the same field of endeavor, teach limitations of claim 16 as stated in claim 6. The motivation to combine Barriac, Mentze, and Thota in dependent claim consists of the same motivation as stated in claim 6.
Claims 7- 9 and 17 - 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Barriac et al. (US 20160366637 A1) or Barriac in view of Mentze (US 20190222519 A1) in further view of (JP 2006528470 A) or JP.
Claim 7
Barriac teaches,
…responsive to receiving the first signal, the one or more processors may be configured to disallow, for the duration,…
(See Barriac paragraph 0068, ...the STA A 215 may determine whether the packet belongs to the OBSS to be deferred to based on a color of the packet and whether to the color of the packet matches the color of the BSS C, 231, BSS D 241, or BSS E 251. If the color matches, then the STA A 215 may defer transmissions;...)
Shows the STA A 215 deferring transmissions of packets based on a received packet matching a color of a BSS
…the second transmitter.
(See Barriac paragraph 0041, In addition to receiving packets belonging to the BSS A 211, the STA A 215 may also receive packets belonging to the BSSs B-E 221, 231, 241, 251 transmitted from the access points and stations of those BSSs.)
Shows receiving different packets from different BSSs
However, Barriac fails to explicitly teach,
…the receiver to switch to receiving the second packet from…
Nevertheless, Mentze, in the same field of endeavor, teaches,
…the receiver to switch to receiving the second packet from…
(See Mentze paragraph 0010, the present disclosure may examine the first 50 packets and then drop the next 450 packets to receive another set of packets that are associated with a different flow.)
Shows the receiver receiving 50 packets, dropping 450 packets, and receiving another set of packets
The motivation to combine Barriac and Mentze in the dependent claim consists of the same motivation as stated in claim 1.
However, Barriac fails to explicitly teach,
The device according to claim 6, wherein the controller is configured to determine
a duration for which the second packet is to be transmitted from the second transmitter; and…
Nevertheless, JP, in the same field of endeavor, teaches,
The device according to claim 6, wherein the controller is configured to determine
a duration for which the second packet is to be transmitted from the second transmitter; and…
(See JP page 3 paragraph 3, ...the node in the communication system 100 determines the duration of transmission of the first transmitter (remote device), and based on the duration and the start time or end time, the start time of the second transmitter...)
Shows determining the start time for transmission for a second transmitter
The motivation to combine Barriac, Mentze and JP in the dependent claim consists of the same motivation as stated in claim 5.
Claim 8
Barriac fails to explicitly teach limitations of claim 8. Nevertheless, JP, in the same field of endeavor, teaches,
The device according to claim 3, wherein the controller is configured to: determine a session having a start time and an end time; and responsive to determining the session, send the first signal at the start time to the one or more processors and send the second signal at the end time to the one or more processors.
(See JP 2006528470 A page 4 paragraph 6, Since the durations of packets A and B are unique, the duration and start time or end time of packet A may be used to uniquely determine the duration and time position of packets B, C, and D.)
Shows the duration of packet A with a start time and end time may be used to determine transmission start and end times for packets B, C, and D
The motivation to combine Barriac, Mentze and JP in the dependent claim consists of the same motivation as stated in claim 5.
Claim 9
Barriac fails to explicitly teach limitations of claim 9. Nevertheless, JP, in the same field of endeavor, teaches,
The device according to claim 8, wherein the controller is configured to: determine timing of traffic transmitted from the second transmitter; and determine the session according to the timing of the traffic transmitted from the second transmitter.
(See JP 2006528470 A page 4 paragraph 6, ...the duration of the RTS / CTS transmission and the start time or end time are utilized to uniquely determine the duration and time position of the subsequent packet.)
Shows the determination of timing transmitted relies on the start and end time of subsequent packets
(See JP 2006528470 A page 5 paragraph 1, ...the duration and time position of the packet E and the end of the packet sequence are uniquely determined by the duration of the packet D and the start time or end time.)
Shows the determining the session or duration of packet E relies on the determination of the timing of the start and end time of packet D
The motivation to combine Barriac, Mentze and JP in the dependent claim consists of the same motivation as stated in claim 5.
Claim 17
Barriac teaches limitations of claim 17 as stated in claim 7. However, Barriac fails to explicitly teach limitations of claim 17 as stated in claim 7. Nevertheless, Mentze and JP, in the same field of endeavor, teaches limitations of claim 17 as stated in claim 7. The motivation to combine Barriac, Mentze and JP in dependent claim consists of the same motivation as stated in claim 5.
Claim 18
Barriac fails to explicitly teach limitations of claim 18 as stated in claim 8. Nevertheless, Mentze and JP, in the same field of endeavor, teaches limitations of claim 18 as stated in claim 8. The motivation to combine Barriac, Mentze and JP in dependent claim consists of the same motivation as stated in claim 5.
Claim 19
Barriac fails to explicitly teach limitations of claim 19 as stated in claim 9. Nevertheless, Mentze and JP, in the same field of endeavor, teaches limitations of claim 19 as stated in claim 9. The motivation to combine Barriac, Mentze and JP in dependent claim consists of the same motivation as stated in claim 5.
Claims 10 and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Barriac et al. (US 20160366637 A1) or Barriac in view of Mentze (US 20190222519 A1) in further view of LV et al. (CN 115002792 B) or LV.
Claim 10
Barriac fails to explicitly teach limitations of claim 10. Nevertheless, LV, in the same field of endeavor, teaches,
The device according to claim 8, wherein a duration of the session is greater than or equal to one second.
(See LV page 5 paragraph 1, ...the average value of the signal strength of the interference measurement signal measured by the target UE within at least one second duration is greater than a fifth preset threshold.)
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling data of the claimed invention to combine a device with a receiver in wireless local area network or WLAN with a processor to allow the receiver to receive a packet, determine to accept or drop the packet, and transmit a different packet before the completion of reception of the packet as disclosed by Barriac with a duration session longer than or equal to one second as disclosed by LV to increase the efficiency of the system (i.e. to prevent higher state of contention in transmission window).
Claim 20
Barriac fails to explicitly teach limitations of claim 20 as stated in claim 10. Nevertheless, LV, in the same field of endeavor, teaches limitations of claim 19 as stated in claim 9. The motivation to combine Barriac, Mentze and LV in dependent claim consists of the same motivation as stated in claim 10.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Elshafie et al. (US 20230397107 A1) or Elshafie teaches a user equipment or UE receiving and indication and wakeup signal and transmitting feedback of reception of the wakeup signal.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SAMUEL ROBERGE BETTENDORF whose telephone number is (571)272-4352. The examiner can normally be reached Mon - Fri, 8:30a.m.-5:00p.m..
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, Edan Orgad can be reached at 571-272-7884. 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.
/SAMUEL ROBERGE BETTENDORF/Examiner, Art Unit 2414
/EDAN ORGAD/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2414
Prosecution Insights