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 .
This action is in response to the application filed on 1/22/2024.
Claims 1-20 have been examined and rejected.
The IDSs filed on 122/2024, 7/9/2024, 3/10/2025 and 2/12/2026 have been considered.
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.
Claim(s) 1, 3, 5-10, 13-18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chitrakar (US 20230156840 A1).
Regarding Claim 1, Chitrakar discloses an access point (AP) device (see FIG. 3. AP MLD 314) comprising: a communication interface (see para 60, A Multi-link setup performed between any one pair of affiliated STA and an affiliated AP may provide access to the distributed services (DS)/i.e., representing network interface, for one or more affiliated STAs of the non-AP MLD); and a processor (see FIG. 3. MLD MAC address/i.e. representing the MAC processor) operably coupled to the communication interface, the processor configured to cause:
establishing a logical AP multi-link device (MLD) with which a plurality of APs (Examiners Note: Using BRI consistent with the specification, the limitation “logical AP MLD” has been interpreted to mean: a AP MLD with which a plurality of Aps are affiliated. Based on this interpretation, see FIG. 3, para 56, an AP MLD 302 (AP MLD 314 has details of AP MLD 302)/i.e., representing a logical AP MLD, with multiple BSSs and non-AP MLDs 304, 306 and 308 in range of the BSSs in accordance with various embodiments. The AP MLD 302 may be illustrated as schematic 314, comprising a MAC-service access point (MAC-SAP) for accessing the distribution service (DS), an MLD MAC address that identifies the AP MLD, and three affiliated APs (i.e. AP1, AP2 and AP3)) including one or more APs affiliated with a first physical AP MLD (see FIG. 3. AP1) and one or more APs affiliated with a second physical AP MLD (see FIG. 3. AP2) are affiliated (see para 56, an MLD MAC address that identifies the AP MLD, and three affiliated APs (i.e. AP1, AP2 and AP3).
Chitrakar does not specify a processor coupled to an interface in an AP MLD.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to specify the access point MLD with a processor coupled to an interface, as Chitrakar already discloses a MLD MAC address (generated by MLD processor) and access to the distributed services which is via a network interface.
Regarding Claim 3, Chitrakar discloses the AP device of claim 1, further comprising: a plurality of APs affiliated with the AP device (see para 56, FIG. 3. an MLD MAC address that identifies the AP MLD, and three affiliated APs (i.e. AP1, AP2 and AP3), wherein at least one AP is affiliated with the logical AP MLD (see FIG. 3, para 56, an AP MLD 302 (AP MLD 314 has details of AP MLD 302)/i.e., representing a logical AP MLD).
Regarding Claim 5, Chitrakar discloses the AP device of claim 3, wherein the processor is configured to further cause: transmitting, by an AP affiliated with the logical AP MLD, a frame including information for discovering the logical AP MLD (see FIG. 5., depicts communication flow between an AP MLD and a non-AP MLD for multi-link discovery).
Regarding Claim 6, Chitrakar discloses the AP device of claim 5, wherein the processor is configured to further cause: receiving, by an AP affiliated with the logical AP MLD, from an STA affiliated with a non-AP MLD, a request frame requesting information for discovering the logical AP MLD, wherein the frame including information for discovering the logical AP MLD is transmitted to the non-AP MLD in response to the request frame (see FIG. 5., depicts communication flow between an AP MLD and a non-AP MLD for multi-link discovery, authentication, setup, TID-to-link mapping and communication; para 61, during a multi-link discovery phase, non-AP MLD checks quality of links 1, 2 and 3 by transmitting a probe request frame on each link to AP MLD. The probe request frame may comprise a transmit power control (TPC) request element. The AP MLD may, in response to receiving the probe request frame, transmit a beacon or probe response frame on each link to the non-AP MLD. The beacon or probe response frame may comprise an MLD MAC address of the AP MLD as well as a TPC report element. After completing the multi-link discovery phase, the non-AP MLD may be considered to be at a state 1).
Regarding Claim 7, Chitrakar discloses the AP device of claim 3, wherein the processor is configured to further cause: transmitting, by an AP affiliated with the logical AP MLD, a beacon frame including information for the logical AP MLD (see FIG. 5, AP MLD 501/i.e., AP affiliated with logical AP MLD 502, transmits a beacon/probe response frame to the non-AP MLD at step 508).
Regarding Claim 8, Chitrakar discloses the AP device of claim 7, wherein the processor is configured to further cause: transmitting, by an AP affiliated with the logical AP MLD, a frame including a link identifier and an identifier of the logical AP MLD, the identifier of the logical AP MLD coupled with the link identifier indicates a link of a plurality of links in the logical AP MLD (see FIG. 14C. depicting details of the response frame, para 83, the multi-link action (response) frame has each of the one or more link information field may comprise a link ID subfield, along with the MLD MAC address as depicted in the multi-link-element setup response 1402).
Regarding Claim 9, Chitrakar discloses the AP device of claim 3, wherein the processor is configured to further cause: receiving, from a station (STA) affiliated with a non-AP MLD, by an AP affiliated with the logical AP MLD, an association request frame to request an association with the logical AP MLD (see para 63, multi-link setup/association may be initiated by the non-AP MLD 504 by transmitting a multi-link setup request 514 to the AP MLD 502 on, for example, link 2), and transmitting, by an AP affiliated with the logical AP MLD, an association response frame to the STA affiliated with the non-AP MLD in response to the association request frame (see para 64, In response to the request and based on the request information, the AP MLD 502 sets up the requested links 1, 2 and 3, and then transmits a multi-link setup response 516 to the non-AP MLD 504 informing the setting up of the links. At 518, the non-AP MLD 504 is now authenticated/associated, and the 3 requested links are now setup).
Regarding Claim 10, Chitrakar discloses the AP device of claim 9, wherein the association response frame includes an association identifier and an identifier of the AP device, the identifier of the AP device coupled with the association identifier indicates a value assigned to the non-AP MLD by the logical AP MLD for association (see para 55, During Multi-link Setup, additional links (i.e. links other than the one used to exchange the Multi-link Setup frames) should not be set up (established) based on capabilities information alone. A first MLD can request a second MLD whose links are to be set up as part of a Multi-link Setup, independent of the link capabilities e.g. using a Setup Request field in a Multi-link Setup Request frame. The MLD may also include information about link quality (e.g. Uplink/Downlink (UL/DL) link margin, UL/DL Path Loss etc.) of the requested links. Further, the second MLD will only set up the links requested by the first MLD during the Multi-link Setup (e.g. assignment of association identifiers (AIDs), inclusion in the Association Record etc.). The links that are set up may be called a Multi-link set).
Regarding Claim 13, Chitrakar discloses a non-AP MLD (see FIG. 3. Non-AP MLD 312) comprising:
a plurality of non-AP stations (STAs) affiliated with the non-AP MLD (see FIG. 3 depiction STA1, STA2, and STA3 associated with non-AP MLD 321; para 57, Further, the non-AP MLDs 304, 306 and 308 may be illustrated as schematic 316, comprising a MAC-SAP for accessing the DS, an MLD MAC address that identifies the non-AP MLD, and three affiliated STAs (i.e. STA1, STA2 and STA3). Each STA has its own STA MAC address at the MAC layer and is connected via a link at the PHY layer for transmitting and receiving data (i.e. STA1 is connected via link 1, STA2 is connected via link2 and STA3 is connected via link 3)); and a processor operably coupled to the communication interface (see para 60, A Multi-link setup performed between any one pair of affiliated STA and an affiliated AP may provide access to the distributed services (DS)/i.e., representing network interface, for one or more affiliated STAs of the non-AP MLD), the processor configured to cause:
associating with a logical AP MLD with which a plurality of APs including one or more APs affiliated with a first physical AP MLD and one or more APs affiliated with a second physical AP MLD are affiliated (see FIG. 3., para 56, an AP MLD 302 with multiple BSSs and non-AP MLDs 304, 306 and 308 in range of the BSSs. The AP MLD 302 may be illustrated as schematic 314, comprising a MAC-service access point (MAC-SAP) for accessing the distribution service (DS), an MLD MAC address that identifies the AP MLD, and three affiliated APs (i.e. AP1, AP2 and AP3)/i.e., first/second/third physical APs. Each AP has its own STA MAC address at the MAC layer and is connected via a link at the PHY layer for transmitting and receiving data (i.e. AP1 is connected via link 1, AP2 is connected via link2 and AP3 is connected via link 3).
Chitrakar does not specify a processor coupled to an interface in an non-AP MLD.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to specify the non-access point MLD with a processor coupled to an interface, as Chitrakar already discloses a MLD MAC address (generated by MLD processor) and access to the distributed services which is via a network interface, at both the station (non-AP MLD) and the access point MLD.
Regarding Claim 14, Chitrakar discloses the non-AP MLD of claim 13, wherein the processor is configured to further cause: receiving, by an STA affiliated with the non-AP MLD, a frame including information for discovering the logical AP MLD (see FIG. 5., depicts communication flow between an AP MLD and a non-AP MLD for multi-link discovery).
Regarding Claim 15, Chitrakar discloses the non-AP MLD of claim 14, wherein the information for discovering the logical AP MLD includes at least one of: an information item indicating whether the plurality of APs are able to be associated with the logical AP MLD (see FIG. 5 depicting sequential steps of multi-link discovery, multi-link authentication, multi-link association between an AP-MLD 502 and non-AP MLD 504), .
Regarding Claim 16, Chitrakar discloses the non-AP MLD of claim 14, wherein the processor is configured to further cause: transmitting, by an STA affiliated with the non-AP MLD, to an AP affiliated with the logical AP MLD, a request frame requesting information for discovering the logical AP MLD, wherein the frame including information for discovering the logical AP MLD is received in response to the request frame (see FIG. 5., depicts communication flow between an AP MLD and a non-AP MLD for multi-link discovery, authentication, setup, TID-to-link mapping and communication; para 61, during a multi-link discovery phase, non-AP MLD checks quality of links 1, 2 and 3 by transmitting a probe request frame on each link to AP MLD. The probe request frame may comprise a transmit power control (TPC) request element. The AP MLD may, in response to receiving the probe request frame, transmit a beacon or probe response frame on each link to the non-AP MLD. The beacon or probe response frame may comprise an MLD MAC address of the AP MLD as well as a TPC report element. After completing the multi-link discovery phase, the non-AP MLD may be considered to be at a state 1).
Regarding Claim 17, Chitrakar discloses the non-AP MLD of claim 13, wherein the processor is configured to further cause: receiving, by an STA affiliated with the non-AP MLD, a beacon frame including information for the logical AP MLD (see FIG. 5, AP MLD 501/i.e., AP affiliated with logical AP MLD 502, transmits a beacon/probe response frame to the non-AP MLD at step 508).
Regarding Claim 18, Chitrakar discloses the non-AP MLD of claim 13, wherein the processor is configured to further cause: transmitting, by an STA affiliated with the non-AP MLD, to an AP affiliated with the logical AP MLD, an association request frame to request an association with the logical AP MLD, and receiving, by an STA affiliated with the non-AP MLD, an association response frame to the non-AP MLD in response to the association request frame (see FIG. 14C. depicting details of the response frame, para 83, the multi-link action (response) frame has each of the one or more link information field may comprise a link ID subfield, along with the MLD MAC address as depicted in the multi-link-element setup response 1402).
Claim(s) 2, 12 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chitrakar in view of Ho (US 20240107411 A1).
Regarding Claim 2, Chitrakar discloses the AP device of claim 1, but does not disclose: transferring a functionality of the logical AP MLD to a target AP MLD in response to a handover of a non-AP station (STA) from a serving AP MLD to the target AP MLD
In the same field of endeavor, Ho teaches this limitation: see FIG. 7 depicts an example transfer of multi-link device (MLD) context including a handover buffer during a make-before-break handover, para 75-78, a gateway (GW) is shown connected to AP1, and all traffic goes through AP1, and AP1 has an uplink (UL) reordering buffer… handover to AP2 begins. First, downlink (DL) duplication is initiated where AP1 may start to duplicate DL packets, by forwarding the DL packets to AP2/i.e., target. Upon receipt, AP2 sends the DL packets to STA2. UL duplication may also begin when STA2 starts to duplicate UL packets and sends the dup to AP2 … after UL packets are forwarded, the MLD context may be relocated. MLD context location is based on agreed timer and an UL sequence number (SN) value, among other things. MLD context may comprise any of association context, security context, block-ACK (BA) sessions, TID-to-link mapping, a DL packets buffer, the ROB, and PN (packet number). During the MLD context relocation, AP1 terminates sending UL packets to gateway, then sends the MLD context to AP2, while STA1 may stop transmission to AP1. After relocation, at (4), AP2 may receive uplink packets and combine them with its local RO buffer. AP2 starts to send UL packets to the gateway, while AP2 stops forwarding UL packets to AP1 (if it has been forwarding the packets to AP1). In some cases, AP2 sends a “switch path layer 2 (L2) message” to the gateway, and the gateway switches data path to AP2. To finish the handover procedure, AP2 may send a handover “done msg” to AP1. AP1 stops DL transmission and clears any unsent DL packets.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the system of Chitrakar so as to transfer a functionality of the logical AP MLD to a target AP MLD in response to a handover, as taught by Ho, the motivation being to perform make-before-break handover, and to address the issue of increasing bandwidth requirements that are demanded for wireless communications systems, different schemes are being developed to allow multiple user terminals to communicate with a single access point by sharing the channel resources while achieving high data throughputs (see Ho, paras 1-3).
Regarding Claim 12, Chitrakar discloses the AP device of claim 11, but does not disclose detials regarding: transmitting a context transfer frame from a serving AP to the target AP, wherein the context transfer frame includes at least one of: a type of context to be transferred, or a transfer time at which context transfer occurs.
In the same field of endeavor, Ho teaches this limitation: see FIG. 7. depicts an example transfer of multi-link device (MLD) context including a handover buffer during a make-before-break handover see paras 75-78, an initial state (1), all traffic goes through AP1. As shown at (2), handover to AP2/i.e., target, begins. First, downlink (DL) duplication is initiated where AP1 may start to duplicate DL packets, by forwarding the DL packets to AP2. Upon receipt, AP2 sends the DL packets to STA2. UL duplication may also begin when STA2 starts to duplicate UL packets and sends the dup to AP2, for example, over-the-air (OTA Sig 1). In one case, AP2 buffers all UL packets received at the ROB, without forwarding the packets to the gateway (otherwise, the packet may be received out of order at the gateway). In an alternative case, AP2 forwards all received UL packets to AP1 for reordering. As shown at (3), after UL packets are forwarded, the MLD context may be relocated. MLD context location is based on agreed timer and an UL sequence number (SN) value, among other things. MLD context may comprise any of association context, security context, block-ACK (BA) sessions, TID-to-link mapping, a DL packets buffer, the ROB, and PN (packet number). During the MLD context relocation, AP1 terminates sending UL packets to gateway, then sends the MLD context to AP2 … After relocation, at (4), AP2 may receive uplink packets and combine them with its local RO buffer.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the system of Chitrakar so as to include the functionality of the context transfer based on a timer, as taught by Ho, the motivation being to perform make-before-break handover (see Ho, paras 1-3).
Claim(s) 4, is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chitrakar in view of Sedin (US 20230254740 A1).
Regarding Claim 4, Chitrakar discloses the AP device of claim 3, wherein the processor is configured to further cause: tearing down a functionality of the logical AP MLD (see FIG. 9 an illustration of a multi-link teardown frame, para 70, The multi-link teardown frame comprises a frame control field, a duration field, three address fields, a sequence control field, a HT control field, a category field, a multi-link action field which is set to a value of 1 (i.e. set to multi-link teardown) and an FCS field) in response to a handover of a non-AP station (STA) from a serving AP MLD to the target AP MLD.
Chitrakar does not specify a “handover” using the tear down functionality: i.e., the limitation: tearing down a functionality in response to handover the a non-AP station (STA) to the target AP MLD.
In the same field of endeavor, Sedin teaches this limitation: see FIG. 5a and FIG. 5b., paras 204-210, FIG. 5a illustrates a STA being connected to the network through both AP node 1 and AP node 2 with one link each (which is based on a setup with 2 APs and 1 STA (corresponding to FIG. 4a)). The STA is associated with the multi-link device (MLD) entity AP1 and connected to the network through AP node 1 using two links. The STA has no or a very poor channel to AP node 2 and is therefore not associated to it. In an attempt to move from AP node 1 to AP node 2, STA is associated with AP node 1 in a multi-AP multi-link request message is used to perform the handover. It is decided that the link to AP node 1 is so poor that both links should be moved to AP node 2. The STA is still connected to the MLD AP1 entity. From a robustness perspective, it is desirable to maintain links through multiple APs to a large extent (as long as the links are good enough). FIG. 5b illustrates that once AP node 1 has emptied its buffer or session, the multi-AP multi-link teardown is performed to disconnect from MLD AP1. Immediately after the teardown, the STA associates with the MLD AP2 entity/i.e., the target AP MLD.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the system of Chitrakar so as to use the teardown frame in response to handover, as taught by Sedin, the motivation being a connection to the first base station is not teared down until a connection to the second base station has been established (see Sedin, para 3).
Claim(s) 11, 19-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chitrakar in view of Dong (US 20250133454 A1).
Regarding Claims 11, 19, Chitrakar does not disclose details regarding: receiving, by an AP affiliated with the logical AP MLD, from a station (STA) affiliated with a non-AP MLD, a handover request frame to request a handover from a serving AP MLD to a target AP MLD.
In the same field of endeavor, Dong teaches this limitation: see FIG. 4. And FIG. 2., para 59, the non-AP STA MLD may request an operation to perform the BSS handover within the AP MLD… operations S440 and S450 are performed between the access point AP2 of the AP MLD and the station STA2 of the non-AP STA MLD, and when AP2 receives a BSS handover management request frame (the third message frame) indicating that STA2 requests to perform a BSS handover within the AP MLD (for example, STA2 may switch to the BSS of AP1 or AP3), AP2 may send a disassociation frame (the fourth message frame) to STA2, thereby unlinking a second connection Link2 between AP2 and STA2. Upon receiving the disassociation frame (the fourth message frame), the station STA2 of the non-AP STA MLD may unlink the corresponding connection and handover to communicate with the BSS of another affiliated access point within the same AP MLD.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the system of Chitrakar so that the AP MLD receives a handover management request from a station (non-AP MLD), as taught by Dong, the motivation being, to enhance the throughput of the BSS, BSS handover occurs within the ESS (extended service set) (see Dong, para 35).
Regarding Claim 20, Chitrakar does not disclose details regarding: the handover request frame comprises at least one of: or
In the same field of endeavor, Dong teaches the limitation “information indicating links which need to be deleted from multi-link operation of the non-AP MLD”, it further discloses: see FIG. 4. And FIG. 2., para 59, the non-AP STA MLD may request an operation to perform the BSS handover within the AP MLD… operations S440 and S450 are performed between the access point AP2 of the AP MLD and the station STA2 of the non-AP STA MLD, and when AP2 receives a BSS handover management request frame (the third message frame) indicating that STA2 requests to perform a BSS handover within the AP MLD (for example, STA2 may switch to the BSS of AP1 or AP3), AP2 may send a disassociation frame (the fourth message frame) to STA2/i.e., disassociation frame indicates links to be deleted from multi-link operation, thereby unlinking a second connection Link2 between AP2 and STA2. Upon receiving the disassociation frame (the fourth message frame), the station STA2 of the non-AP STA MLD may unlink the corresponding connection and handover to communicate with the BSS of another affiliated access point within the same AP MLD.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the system of Chitrakar so that the AP MLD receives a handover management request from a station (non-AP MLD), as taught by Dong, the motivation being, to enhance the throughput of the BSS, BSS handover occurs within the ESS (extended service set) (see Dong, para 35).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to DEEPA BELUR whose telephone number is (571)270-3722. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8 am - 4:30 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, Kevin Bates can be reached at 571-272-3980. 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.
/DEEPA BELUR/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2472