HDETAILED ACTION
This is in response to US App. 18/489,821. Claims 1-24 have been examined.
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 . 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.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 1-5, 10-17, 22-24 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being unpatentable by Sun (US 2016/198361; included in IDS).
Regarding Claim 1,
An apparatus for wireless communication, comprising: a processing system that includes one or more processors and one or more memories coupled with the one or more processors, the processing system configured to cause the apparatus to:
perform a first communication session with a wireless communication device and one or more second communication sessions in which a co-existence condition is experienced, wherein the co-existence condition is associated with interference at the apparatus, the interference being experienced due to the first communication session and the one or more second communication sessions [Sun: 0057; when the STA 114 expects various interference bursts (e.g., the LTE interference bursts 456, 458, 460), the STA 114 may not want to receive Wi-Fi transmissions from the AP 104 when the interference bursts start because the interference bursts may interfere with the ability of the STA 114 to successfully receive the Wi-Fi data transmissions; 0058; in an aspect, the STA 114 may identify interference information associated with the LTE traffic stream (a periodic traffic stream) by determining that an LTE connection exists and determining a third offset value and a third interval/duration value associated with the interference bursts of the LTE traffic stream; 0053; In another example, if the first message contains the first stream ID (e.g., stream ID 1), the first vendor identifier, the first type field, and the first length field, the AP 104 may register or store the interference information (e.g., the first offset value and the first interval/duration value associated with the first stream ID) for the first stream ID; 0054; similarly, upon receiving the second message from the STA 114 and determining the second message includes the second stream ID, the second vendor identifier, the second type field, and the second length field, the AP 104 may register the interference information (e.g., the second offset value and the second interval/duration value associated with the second stream ID) for the second stream ID];
obtain a first message from the wireless communication device [Sun: 0056; For example, in the LTE connection, the STA 114 may receive data in downlink traffic slots 452 and transmit data in uplink traffic slots 454; by transmitting data in the uplink traffic slots 454, the STA 114 may generate interference that impedes the successful reception of data from other connections (e.g., the WLAN connection with the AP 104)]; and
output, for transmission, a second message responsive to the first message, wherein the second message carries information regarding the co-existence condition [Sun: 0058; as such, the STA 114 may report the interference bursts to the AP 104 by sending a third message or frame (e.g., a third ATS frame in U-APSD coexistence mode 1 request) to the AP 104 notifying the AP 104 of when the STA 114 expects to experience LTE interference bursts; 0045; the ATS frame 202 may indicate that the STA expects interference bursts at a number of interference windows 206, 216, 226 and is unable to receive Wi-Fi transmissions during those interference windows 206, 216, 226].
Regarding Claim 2,
wherein the information regarding the co-existence condition indicates that the apparatus is experiencing the co-existence condition and further indicates whether the apparatus is able to obtain one or more additional packets from the wireless communication device while experiencing the co-existence condition [Sun: 0054; based on the received messages, the AP 104 may generate a schedule of interference bursts associated with the STA 114 (and other STAs) in order to determine when to transmit data to each of the STAs; 0055; subsequently, the STA 114 may transmit a first trigger message 430 (e.g., a U-APSD trigger message) to the AP 104; the first trigger message 430 may indicate to the AP 104 that the STA 114 is available for a data transmission; the STA 114 may transmit the first trigger message 430 when interference to the STA 114 is not present. In response receiving the first trigger message 430, the AP 104 may transmit a first data transmission 432 to the STA 114; the first data transmission 432 from the AP 104 to the STA 114 may be based on the first offset value and/or the first interval/duration received in the first message and the second offset value and/or the second interval/duration value received in the second message].
Regarding Claim 3,
wherein the information regarding the co-existence condition includes information with respect to one or more parameters to be used by the wireless communication device for communicating with the apparatus [Sun: 0058; in an aspect, the STA 114 may identify interference information associated with the LTE traffic stream (a periodic traffic stream) by determining that an LTE connection exists and determining a third offset value and a third interval/duration value associated with the interference bursts of the LTE traffic stream; the interference information may include the third offset value (e.g., 1 ms) that may indicate when the AP 104 may expect the third LTE interference burst 456, for example)].
Regarding Claim 4,
wherein the information regarding the co-existence condition indicates an expected duration of the co-existence condition [Sun: 0058; in an aspect, the STA 114 may identify interference information associated with the LTE traffic stream (a periodic traffic stream) by determining that an LTE connection exists and determining a third offset value and a third interval/duration value associated with the interference bursts of the LTE traffic stream … the interference information may include the third interval/duration value (e.g., 5 ms) that may indicate an interval at which the AP 104 may expect the remaining LTE interference bursts (e.g., the fourth LTE interference burst 458, the additional LTE interference bursts 460)].
Regarding Claim 5,
wherein the second message is an acknowledgment message carrying the information regarding the co-existence condition [Sun: 0044; FIG. 2 is a diagram 200 of a method of supporting coexistence for one stream (e.g., using unscheduled automatic power save delivery (U-APSD)). In IEEE 802.11v, for example, U-APSD coexistence supports the scheduling of interference bursts for one stream; a STA may use IEEE 802.11v signaling to advertise interference windows to an AP, and the AP may avoid downlink transmissions during those interference windows; 0045; the AP may transmit a first set of data 212 (e.g., in a physical layer convergence protocol (PLCP) protocol data unit (PPDU)) to the STA; after successfully receiving the first set of data 212, the STA may transmit a third acknowledgment frame/message 214 to the AP].
Regarding Claim 10,
wherein the acknowledgement message comprises a legacy acknowledgement message having one or more fields configured to carry the information regarding the co-existence condition [Sun: 0044; FIG. 2 is a diagram 200 of a method of supporting coexistence for one stream (e.g., using unscheduled automatic power save delivery (U-APSD)). In IEEE 802.11v, for example, U-APSD coexistence supports the scheduling of interference bursts for one stream; a STA may use IEEE 802.11v signaling to advertise interference windows to an AP, and the AP may avoid downlink transmissions during those interference windows; 0045; Referring to the FIG. 2, the STA upon identifying/determining interference bursts associated with a data stream (e.g., Bluetooth data stream), the STA may transmit an add traffic stream (ATS) frame (or message) 202 to the AP (as previously noted, the ATS frame 202 may also be known as an ADDTS frame such as in the IEEE 802.11v standards); the ATS frame 202 may indicate that the STA expects interference bursts at a number of interference windows 206, 216, 226 and is unable to receive Wi-Fi transmissions during those interference windows 206, 216, 226 … the AP may transmit a first set of data 212 (e.g., in a physical layer convergence protocol (PLCP) protocol data unit (PPDU)) to the STA; after successfully receiving the first set of data 212, the STA may transmit a third acknowledgment frame/message 214 to the AP].
Regarding Claim 11,
further comprising: at least one transceiver configured to receive the first message and to transmit the second message, wherein the apparatus is configured as a wireless station (STA) or a wireless access point (AP) [Sun: 0045; the AP may transmit a first set of data 212 (e.g., in a physical layer convergence protocol (PLCP) protocol data unit (PPDU)) to the STA; after successfully receiving the first set of data 212, the STA may transmit a third acknowledgment frame/message 214 to the AP; in a subsequent time slot (e.g., at 4 ms), the AP may determine that the STA is experiencing another interference burst and, accordingly, the AP may not transmit data to the STA during a second interference window 216].
Note:
A transceiver is inherent in a STA and an AP.
Regarding Claims 12, 15-17 and 22-23, which recite the same claim limitations as those in claims 1-2, 4-5, and 10-11 above, the same rationale of rejection as presented in claims 1-2, 4-5, and 10-11 is applicable.
Regarding Claim 13,
wherein alternation of the one or more aspects comprises altering one or more parameters to be used for transmission of a signal of the first communication session to the wireless communication device [Sun: 0046; the U-APSD Coexistence field (or a similar field) may include additional fields or parameters such as element ID (e.g., 1 octet in size), length (e.g., 1 octet in size), timing synchronization function (TSF) offset (e.g., 8 octets in size), interval/duration (e.g., 4 octets in size), and optional sub-elements (e.g., of variable size); the TSF offset may indicate an offset value in units of time (e.g., milliseconds) as to when the next interference burst/interference window may occur; 0050; based on the timing information, the STA 114 may report an offset value and an interval/duration value related interference bursts to the AP 104 for purpose of scheduling transmissions from the AP 104; in an aspect, this interference information may be transmitted in the first message to the AP 104].
Regarding Claim 14,
wherein alteration of the one or more aspects comprises pause from outputting of a signal of the first communication session for transmission to the wireless communication device [Sun: 0058; the STA 114 may transmit the interference information in the third message to the AP 104, and the third message may include a third stream ID (e.g., stream ID 3) associated with the interference information, and the third stream ID may be associated with the LTE traffic stream; the interference information may include the third offset value (e.g., 1 ms) that may indicate when the AP 104 may expect the third LTE interference burst 456, for example; the interference information may include the third interval/duration value (e.g., 5 ms) that may indicate an interval at which the AP 104 may expect the remaining LTE interference bursts (e.g., the fourth LTE interference burst 458, the additional LTE interference bursts 460).
Note:
The interval indicated in the interference information means a pause in output for the first communication session.
Regarding Claim 24, which recites the same claim limitations as those in claim 1 above, the same rationale of rejection as presented in claim 1 is applicable.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claim(s) 6-8 and 18-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sun in view of Singh et al. (US 9,226,102; hereafter Singh).
Regarding Claim 6,
Sun teaches that after successfully receiving the first set of data 212, the STA may transmit a third acknowledgment frame/message 214 to the AP [Sun: 0045].
However, Sun does not teach that the acknowledgement message comprises a multi-station block acknowledgement (Multi-STA BA) message.
Singh teaches:
wherein the acknowledgement message comprises a multi-station block acknowledgement (Multi-STA BA) message [Singh: Col. 7 / lines 20-24; the BA session between STA1 and AP 110 is now active, and AP 110 may transmit aggregated data frames to STA1, and STA1 may confirm receipt of the aggregated data frames using a single block ACK frame].
It would have been obvious for POSITA before the effective filing date of the invention to combine the teachings of Sun and Singh in order to reduce the number of ACK frames transmitted to the AP, which in turn may reduce congestion of the wireless medium [Singh: Col. 1 / lines 32-34].
Regarding Claim 7,
Sun teaches that after successfully receiving the first set of data 212, the STA may transmit a third acknowledgment frame/message 214 to the AP [Sun: 0045].
However, Sun does not teach … an association identifier (AID), a traffic identifier (TID), or an acknowledgement type of the Multi-STA BA message is configured to provide at least a portion of the information regarding the co-existence condition.
Singh teaches:
wherein at least one of an association identifier (AID), a traffic identifier (TID), or an acknowledgement type of the Multi-STA BA message is configured to provide at least a portion of the information regarding the co-existence condition [Singh: Col. 8 / lines 48-52; when device D2 suspends the BA session, device D2 (and device D1) may maintain information corresponding to the BA session (e.g., TID values, BA policies, buffer sizes, lists of devices enabled for the BA session, and so on).
It would have been obvious for POSITA before the effective filing date of the invention to combine the teachings of Sun and Singh in order to reduce the number of ACK frames transmitted to the AP, which in turn may reduce congestion of the wireless medium [Singh: Col. 1 / lines 32-34].
Regarding Claim 8,
Sun teaches that after successfully receiving the first set of data 212, the STA may transmit a third acknowledgment frame/message 214 to the AP [Sun: 0045].
However, Sun does not teach that a BA bitmap of the Multi-STA BA message is configured to provide at least a portion of the information regarding the co-existence condition.
Singh teaches:
wherein a BA bitmap of the Multi-STA BA message is configured to provide at least a portion of the information regarding the co-existence condition [Singh: Col. 8 / lines 48-52; when device D2 suspends the BA session, device D2 (and device D1) may maintain information corresponding to the BA session (e.g., TID values, BA policies, buffer sizes, lists of devices enabled for the BA session, and so on).
It would have been obvious for POSITA before the effective filing date of the invention to combine the teachings of Sun and Singh in order to reduce the number of ACK frames transmitted to the AP, which in turn may reduce congestion of the wireless medium [Singh: Col. 1 / lines 32-34].
Regarding Claims 18-20, which recite the same claim limitations as those in claims 6-8 above, the same rationale of rejection as presented in claims 6-8 is applicable.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 9 and 21 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. See US 2013/203418 [para. 0048].
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SAAD A WAQAS whose telephone number is (571)270-5642. The examiner can normally be reached 8:30 - 5:00 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, Marcus Smith can be reached at (571) 270-1096. 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.
SAAD A. WAQAS
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 2468
/Saad A. Waqas/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2468