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 .
2. The following is a Non-Final Office action in response to Applicant submission received on 10/20/2023.
3. Claims 1-27 are currently pending and have been examined.
Foreign Priority
4. No foreign priority claimed under 35 U.S.C. 119 (a)-(d).
Oath/Declaration
5. The applicant's oath/declaration filed on 10/20/2023 has been reviewed by the examiner and is found to conform to the requirements prescribed in 37 C.F.R. 1.63.
Drawings
6. The applicant’s drawings submitted on 10/20/2023 are acceptable for examination purposes.
Information Disclosure Statement
7. The information disclosure statement submitted by Applicant is in compliance with the provision of 37 CFR 1.97, 1.98 and MPEP § 609. It has been placed in the application file and the information referred to therein has been considered as to the merits.
Claim Objections
Claim 25 is objected to because of the following informalities:
Claim 25 should be amended to read, “a receiver configured to receive an announcement…”
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
8. The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
9. Claim 24 recites the limitation "wherein the Tx Window …" in line 1. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the set of claims.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
10. 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.
11. 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.
12. Claims 1-3, 12, 19, and 25-27 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by HO et al. (US 20220022033 A1).
Regarding claim 1, HO teaches a method of roaming for a non-access point (non-AP) device with a distributed access point (AP) multi-link device (MLD) (HO, para. [0032]: provides a method of roaming for a non-access point (non-AP) device with a distributed AP MLD), wherein the distributed AP MLD includes a plurality of AP MLDs in different devices at different locations having one medium access control (MAC) service access point (SAP) (HO, Fig. 8, para. [0070-0072]: the AP MLD 804 may include more than two APs and having a correspondence MAC-SAP address), comprising:
receiving, by the non-AP device, an announcement from the distributed AP MLD (HO, para. [0036-0037], [0055], [0070]: AP 102 periodically broadcasts beacon frames (“beacons”) (e.g. interpreted as an announcement frame. Moreover, para. [0070] further teaches that AP MLD 804 is an example of AP 102s. That is, AP 102 is a MLD AP) configured to indicate that the distributed AP MLD is a distributed AP MLD with the plurality of AP MLDs in different devices (HO, para. [0070]: The AP MLD 804 is shown to include only two APs 814 and 816 although, in other implementations, the AP MLD 804 may include more than two Aps. HO, para, [0077]: each AP MLD identifies its capabilities in beacon frames, which may indicate multi-link operation (MLO) capabilities) wherein the non-AP device is configured to roam among the plurality of AP MLDs in different devices (HO, para. [0004], [0032], [0038]: the non-AP MLD roams between AP MLDs, such as a STA 104 that is moving relative to its associated AP 102 may perform a “roaming” scan to find another AP 102 having more desirable network characteristics such as a greater received signal strength indicator (RSSI) or a reduced traffic load);
associating, by the non-AP device, with a first AP MLD of the plurality of AP MLDs in different devices (HO, para. [006-0007]: transmitting, by a first station of a plurality of stations of the non-AP MLD to a first AP MLD, an initial association request to initiate an association between the non-AP MLD and the first AP MLD); and
roaming, by the non-AP device, to a second AP MLD of the plurality of AP MLDs in different devices without a reassociation (HO, abstract, para. [0038] teaches a STA 104 that is moving relative to its associated AP 102 (which is an AP MLD per para. [0070] may perform a “roaming” scan to find another AP 102 (e.g., as the second AP MLD) having more desirable network characteristics such as a greater received signal strength indicator (RSSI) or a reduced traffic load).
Regarding claim 2, HO discloses the method of claim 1, wherein the roaming by the non-AP device is without a further key negotiation (HO, para. [0057]: enabling fast secure roaming also known as fast BSS transition, a STA (such as a mobile device or non-AP device) associated with an AP can reestablish existing security or QoS parameters prior to re-associating with a new AP).
Regarding claim 3, HO discloses the method of claim 2, further comprising: negotiating a pairwise transient key (PTK) between the first AP MLD and the non-AP device (HO, para. [0058], [0080]: The initial handshake includes an advance Pairwise Transient Key (PTK) calculation, where the PTK keys are used by the STA and newly-associated AP after an association or reassociation request and response exchange have been completed. Moreover, para. [0080] further teaches the non-AP MLD 902 and the first AP MLD 904 may perform a 4-way handshake 924 to exchange additional keys, such that PTK, that can be used to secure data traffic), wherein the PTK is used between the second AP MLD and the non-AP device when the non-AP device roams to the second AP MLD (HO, para. [0058], [0080], [0083]: The second AP MLD 906 may send an authentication response message 940 to the non-AP MLD 902. The non-AP MLD 902 may then send a reassociation request message 944 to the second AP MLD 906 that includes information provided in the authentication response message 940 and in the authentication request message 930. Paragraph 83 further teaches that corresponding PTK is generated that permit data flow between the non-AP MLD and the second AP MLD).
Regarding claim 12, HO discloses the method of claim 1, wherein associating, by the non-AP device, with a first AP MLD includes indicating by the non-AP device which of the plurality of AP MLDs in different devices frames are exchanged with (HO, para. [0059]: fast transition (FT) can reestablish parameters that are established during an information exchange during an FT initial mobility domain association between the STA (e.g., non-AP device), which may be referred to as the FT Originator (FTO), and an AP (e.g., AP MLD)) and which of the plurality of AP MLDs the non-AP device roams to (HO, para. [0056-0058]: fast transition (FT) provides for an initial handshake between a STA (supplicant) and an AP (authenticator) before the STA roams to a target AP that serves as an authenticator for the FT. The initial handshake includes an advance Pairwise Transient Key (PTK) calculation, where the PTK keys are used by the STA and newly-associated AP after an association or reassociation request and response exchange have been completed).
Regarding claim 25, HO teaches a non-access point (non-AP) device with a distributed access point (AP) multi-link device (MLD) (HO, para. [0032]: provides a method of roaming for a non-access point (non-AP) device with a distributed AP MLD), wherein the distributed AP MLD includes a plurality of AP MLDs in different devices at different locations having one medium access control (MAC) service access point (SAP) (HO, Fig. 8, para. [0070-0072]: the AP MLD 804 may include more than two Aps and having a correspondence MAC-SAP address), comprising:
a receive configured to receive an announcement from a distributed AP MLD (HO, para. [0036-0037], [0055], [0070]: AP MLD 102 periodically broadcasts beacon frames (“beacons”) (e.g. interpreted as an announcement frame. Moreover, para. [0070] further teaches that AP MLD 804 is an example of AP 102s. That is, AP 102 is a MLD AP), wherein the announcement is configured to indicate that the distributed AP MLD is a distributed AP MLD with a plurality of AP MLDs in different devices at different locations (HO, para. [0070]: The AP MLD 804 is shown to include only two APs 814 and 816 although, in other implementations, the AP MLD 804 may include more than two Aps HO, para, [0077]: each AP MLD identifies its capabilities in beacon frames, which may indicate multi-link operation (MLO) capabilities) and wherein the non-AP device is configured to roam among the plurality of AP MLDs in different devices (HO, para. [0004], [0032], [0038]: the non-AP MLD roams between AP MLDs, such as a STA 104 that is moving relative to its associated AP 102 may perform a “roaming” scan to find another AP 102 having more desirable network characteristics such as a greater received signal strength indicator (RSSI) or a reduced traffic load); and
a processor configured to: associate the non-AP device with a first AP MLD of the plurality of AP MLDs in different devices (HO, para. [0006-0007]: transmitting, by a first station of a plurality of stations of the non-AP MLD to a first AP MLD, an initial association request to initiate an association between the non-AP MLD and the first AP MLD); and
roam to a second AP MLD of the plurality of AP MLDs in different devices without a reassociation (HO, abstract, para. [0038]: teaches a STA 104 that is moving relative to its associated AP 102 (which is an AP MLD per para. [0070] may perform a “roaming” scan to find another AP 102 (e.g., as the second AP MLD) having more desirable network characteristics such as a greater received signal strength indicator (RSSI) or a reduced traffic load).
Regarding claim 26, HO teaches the non-AP device of claim 25, wherein the roaming by the non-AP device is without a further key negotiation (HO, para. [0057]: enabling fast secure roaming also known as fast BSS transition, a STA (such as a mobile device or non-AP device) associated with an AP can reestablish existing security or QoS parameters prior to re-associating with a new AP).
Regarding claim 27, HO teaches the non-AP device of claim 25, wherein associating, the non-AP device with a first AP MLD includes indicating by the non-AP device which of the plurality of AP MLDs in different devices frames are exchanged with (HO, para. [0059]: fast transition (FT) can reestablish parameters that are established during an information exchange during an FT initial mobility domain association between the STA (e.g., non-AP device), which may be referred to as the FT Originator (FTO), and an AP (e.g., AP MLD)) and which of the plurality of AP MLDs the non-AP device roams to (HO, para. [0056-0058]: fast transition (FT) provides for an initial handshake between a STA (supplicant) and an AP (authenticator) before the STA roams to a target AP that serves as an authenticator for the FT. The initial handshake includes an advance Pairwise Transient Key (PTK) calculation, where the PTK keys are used by the STA and newly-associated AP after an association or reassociation request and response exchange have been completed).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
13. 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.
14. 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.
15. 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.
16. 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.
17. Claims 4, 5 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over HO et al. (US 20220022033 A1) in view of CHU et al. (US 20210211871 A1).
Regarding claim 4, HO discloses all the subject matter of the method of claim 3, but does not appear to teach wherein a medium access control (MAC) service access point (SAP) is used to calculate the PTK.
In the same of endeavor, CHU teaches wherein a medium access control (MAC) service access point (SAP) is used to calculate the PTK (CHU, para. [0012]: recites the use of medium access control (MAC) service access point (SAP) to calculate the PTK).
It would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art at the time of invention to combine the teaching of HO with the teaching of CHU to include a medium access control (MAC) service access point (SAP) is used to calculate the PTK as taught by CHU. The motivation for doing so would have been to efficiently execute the multi-link operations.
Regarding claim 5, HO teaches all the subject matter of the method of claim 3, comprising:
receiving a unicast data from the distributed MLD AP (HO, para. [0083]: a non-AP device may receive an authentication response message from an AP MLD), but does not teach wherein a medium access control (MAC) service access point (SAP) replaces a receiver address (RA), transmitter address (TA), or basic service set identifier (BSSID) of a MAC header of a unicast data or management frame for encryption/decryption of the unicast data or management frame if the RA, TA, or BSSID in the MAC header is address of one of the plurality of AP MLDs in different devices.
In the same field of endeavor, CHU teaches wherein a medium access control (MAC) service access point (SAP) replaces a receiver address (RA), transmitter address (TA), or basic service set identifier (BSSID) of a MAC header of a unicast data or management frame for encryption/decryption of the unicast data or management frame if the RA, TA, or BSSID in the MAC header is address of one of the plurality of AP MLDs in different devices (CHU, para. [0062]: the BSSID is replaced by the Media Access Control (MAC) service access point (SAP) address of AP MLD instead of BSSID and the STA's address is replaced the MAC SAP address of the STA MLD. The 802.11 baseline defines the rules about the fast BSS transition of STA1 from BSS1 established by AP1 to BSS2 established by AP2. In embodiments in accordance with the invention, STA's address, AP1's BSSID and AP2 BSSID (RA and TA in the frames for FT) are used for key calculation. When STA MLD1 does the fast BSS transition from multi-link BSS 1 established by AP MLD1 to multi-link BSS 2 established by AP MLD2, the MAC SAP address of STA MLD1, the MAC SAP address of AP MLD1, the MAC SAP address of AP MLD2 that are different from the RA and TA in the frames for FT are used for key calculation).
It would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art at the time of invention to combine the teaching of HO with the teaching of CHU such that a basic service set identifier (BSSID) of a MAC header of a unicast data is replaced by the Media Access Control (MAC) service access point (SAP) as taught by CHU. The motivation for doing so would have been to efficiently execute the multi-link operations.
18. Claims 6-11, 13, 14, 15, 19, and 20-24 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over HO et al. (US 20220022033 A1) in view of Kneckt et al. (US 20240090056 A1).
Regarding claim 6, HO teaches all the subject matter of the method of claim 1, but does not appear to teach wherein the first AP MLD is a reporting AP MLD, and the received announcement announces distributed AP MLD level information, reporting AP MLD level information, and information regarding an AP associated with the reporting AP MLD.
In the same field of endeavor, Kneckt teaches wherein the first AP MLD is a reporting AP MLD (Kneckt, Fig. 10: AP MLD 1 may transmit to STA1 (i.e., it’s a reporting AP MLD), and the received announcement announces distributed AP MLD level information (Kneckt, Figs. 16-17, para. [0141-0142]: in addition to mobility domain association scope between a group of MLD APs and a STA using MDIDs, Wi-Fi 7 AP MLD level associations (e.g., with multi-link association scope using MLD addresses) and Wi-Fi 6 single link associations (e.g., with single link association scope using AP link addresses (BSSIDs)) may also be supported in this example scenario, e.g., considered as the AP MLD level information), reporting AP MLD level information (Kneckt, Figs. 16-17, para. [0141-0142]: Wi-Fi 7 AP MLD level associations (e.g., with multi-link association scope using MLD addresses) and Wi-Fi 6 single link associations (e.g., with single link association scope using AP link addresses (BSSIDs)) may also be supported in this example scenario), and information regarding an AP associated with the reporting AP MLD (Kneckt, para. [0145]: The new APs and AP MLDs may be added to beacons, probe responses, RNRs, etc., for the AP MAP).
It would have been it would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art at the time of invention to combine the teaching of HO with the teaching of Kneckt that discloses a reporting AP MLD and announcements including distributed AP MLD-level information, reporting AP MLD-level information, and information regarding an AP associated with the reporting AP MLD. The motivation for doing so would have been to form concurrent associations with multiple access point wireless devices in the system, which may help reduce delays and overhead from transitions between access point wireless devices within the system, and/or may support improved reliability and performance in the system, Kneckt, para. [0007].
Regarding claim 7, HO and Kneckt teach all the subject matter of the method of claim 6, and further, teach wherein the second AP MLD is a reported AP MLD (Kneckt, para. [0101], [0145]: AP MLD 2 may provide beacon information (i.e., it’s a reporting AP MLD)), , and the received announcement announces reported AP MLD level information (Kneckt, Figs. 16-17, para. [0141-0142]: in addition to mobility domain association scope between a group of MLD APs and a STA using MDIDs, Wi-Fi 7 AP MLD level associations (e.g., with multi-link association scope using MLD addresses) and Wi-Fi 6 single link associations (e.g., with single link association scope using AP link addresses (BSSIDs)) may also be supported in this example scenario), e.g., considered as the AP MLD level information).
It would have been it would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art at the time of invention to combine the teaching of HO with the teaching of Kneckt that discloses the second AP MLD is a reported AP MLD, and the received announcement announces reported AP MLD level information. The motivation for doing so would have been to form concurrent associations with multiple access point wireless devices in the system, which may help reduce delays and overhead from transitions between access point wireless devices within the system, and/or may support improved reliability and performance in the system, Kneckt, para. [0007].
Regarding claim 8, HO and Kneckt teach all the subject matter of the method of claim 7, and further, teach wherein the received announcement announces APs associated with the reported AP MLD (Kneckt, para. [0145]: The AP, AP MLD, and AP MAP parameters may be configured for the AP MLD 2, and the APs may start to send beacons. The AP MLD 2 may perform discovery and join with an available AP MAP; the signaling to join to the discovered AP MAP may include authentication, key setup, and capabilities signaling. The new APs and AP MLDs may be added to beacons, probe responses, RNRs, etc., for the AP MAP).
It would have been it would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art at the time of invention to combine the teaching of HO with the teaching of Kneckt that discloses the received announcement announces APs associated with the reported AP MLD. The motivation for doing so would have been to form concurrent associations with multiple access point wireless devices in the system, which may help reduce delays and overhead from transitions between access point wireless devices within the system, and/or may support improved reliability and performance in the system, Kneckt, para. [0007].
Regarding claim 9, HO and Kneckt teach all the subject matter of the method of claim 6, and further, teach wherein the reporting AP MLD determines whether to announce the information of the reported AP MLD and the information regarding APs associated with the reporting AP MLD (Kneckt, para. Fig. 17, [0142]: a mobility domain identifier (MDID), which may be a 2 octet value defined in 802.11r, may be used as an AP MLD group identifier, which may provide capability to setup links to all AP MLDs in the AP MLD group (e.g., those with the same MDID). The STAs and APs may continue to have a 2-level hierarchy for its MAC addresses. Thus, in addition to mobility domain association scope between a group of MLD APs and a STA using MDIDs, Wi-Fi 7 AP MLD level associations (e.g., with multi-link association scope using MLD addresses) and Wi-Fi 6 single link associations (e.g., with single link association scope using AP link addresses (BSSIDs))).
It would have been it would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art at the time of invention to combine the teaching of HO with the teaching of Kneckt that discloses determines whether to announce the information of the reported AP MLD and the information regarding APs associated with the reporting AP MLD. The motivation for doing so would have been to form concurrent associations with multiple access point wireless devices in the system, which may help reduce delays and overhead from transitions between access point wireless devices within the system, and/or may support improved reliability and performance in the system, Kneckt, para. [0007].
Regarding claim 10, HO and Kneckt teach all the subject matter of the method of claim 9, and further, teach wherein the received announcement includes the information of the reported AP MLD when the reporting AP MLD determines to announce the information of the reported AP MLD (Kneckt, para. [0141-0145]: an AP MLD group identifier, which may provide capability to setup links to all AP MLDs in the AP MLD group (e.g., those with the same MDID)).
It would have been it would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art at the time of invention to combine the teaching of HO with the teaching of Kneckt that discloses the received announcement includes the information of the reported AP MLD when the reporting AP MLD determines to announce the information of the reported AP MLD . The motivation for doing so would have been to form concurrent associations with multiple access point wireless devices in the system, which may help reduce delays and overhead from transitions between access point wireless devices within the system, and/or may support improved reliability and performance in the system, Kneckt, para. [0007].
Regarding claim 11, HO and Kneckt teach all the subject matter of the method of claim 9, and further, teach wherein the received announcement includes the information regarding the APs associated with the reporting AP MLD when the reporting AP MLD determines to announce the information regarding APs associated with the reporting AP MLD (Kneckt, para. Fig. 17, [0142]: a mobility domain identifier (MDID), which may be a 2 octet value defined in 802.11r, may be used as an AP MLD group identifier, which may provide capability to setup links to all AP MLDs in the AP MLD group (e.g., those with the same MDID). The STAs and APs may continue to have a 2-level hierarchy for its MAC addresses. Thus, in addition to mobility domain association scope between a group of MLD APs and a STA using MDIDs, Wi-Fi 7 AP MLD level associations (e.g., with multi-link association scope using MLD addresses) and Wi-Fi 6 single link associations (e.g., with single link association scope using AP link addresses (BSSIDs))).
It would have been it would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art at the time of invention to combine the teaching of HO with the teaching of Kneckt that discloses the received announcement includes the information regarding the APs associated with the reporting AP MLD when the reporting AP MLD determines to announce the information regarding APs associated with the reporting AP MLD. The motivation for doing so would have been to form concurrent associations with multiple access point wireless devices in the system, which may help reduce delays and overhead from transitions between access point wireless devices within the system, and/or may support improved reliability and performance in the system, Kneckt, para. [0007].
Regarding claim 13, HO teaches all the subject matter of the method of claim 1, but does not appear to teach further comprising:
sending a request to the first AP MLD requesting information regarding the distributed AP MLD; and receiving information from the first AP MLD with information regarding the distributed AP MLD.
In the same field of endeavor, Kneckt teaches sending a request to the first AP MLD requesting information regarding the distributed AP MLD (Kneckt, para. [0109], [0112]: an AP wireless device in a multi-AP system could receive a probe request from a non-AP wireless device, and depending on the specificity of the probe request, the AP wireless device could respond with AP information for a corresponding specific subset of the APs in the multi-AP system, which could include information at any or all of AP, AP multi-link device, or multi-AP system level (such as distributed AP MLD)); and
receiving information from the first AP MLD with information regarding the distributed AP MLD (Kneckt, para. [0109], [0112]: the AP wireless device could respond with AP information for a corresponding specific subset of the APs in the multi-AP system, which could include information at any or all of AP, AP multi-link device, or multi-AP system level).
It would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art at the time of invention to combine the teaching of HO with the teaching of Kneckt such that sending a request to the first AP MLD requesting information regarding the distributed AP MLD; and receiving information from the first AP MLD with information regarding the distributed AP MLD as taught by Kneckt. The motivation for doing so would have been to form concurrent associations with multiple access point wireless devices in the system, which may help reduce delays and overhead from transitions between access point wireless devices within the system, and/or may support improved reliability and performance in the system, Kneckt, para. [0007].
Regarding claim 14, HO and Kneckt teach all the subject matter of the method of claim 13, and further, teach wherein sending the request and receiving the information occur before the associating (Kneckt, para. [0151]: the association request frame provided by STA1 2402 to AP1 2404 may be forwarded to the network controller 2410. In 2418, the non-AP MAP may request creation of multiple links. The network controller may decide whether the links may be created and may signal the AP MLDs within the AP MAP to indicate the STA parameters and the created links. The network controller may orchestrate queries to AP MLDs to clarify which links are setup. An AP MLD may decide whether the requested links are created with its affiliated APs. The AP MLD may send responses to the AP MAP queries. The network controller may combine responses from AP MLDs, may possibly further reduce links or reject the association, and may create an association response that is sent to the STA).
It would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art at the time of invention to combine the teaching of HO with the teaching of Kneckt such that sending the request and receiving the information occur before the associating as taught by Kneckt. The motivation for doing so would have been to form concurrent associations with multiple access point wireless devices in the system, which may help reduce delays and overhead from transitions between access point wireless devices within the system, and/or may support improved reliability and performance in the system, Kneckt, para. [0007].
Regarding claim 15, HO and Kneckt teach all the subject matter of the method of claim 13, and further, teach wherein sending the request and receiving the information occur before the roaming (Kneckt, para. [0151], [0178]: the non-AP MAP may request creation of multiple links. The network controller may decide whether the links may be created and may signal the AP MLDs within the AP MAP to indicate the STA parameters and the created links. The network controller may orchestrate queries to AP MLDs to clarify which links are setup. An AP MLD may decide whether the requested links are created with its affiliated APs. The AP MLD may send responses to the AP MAP queries. The network controller may combine responses from AP MLDs, may possibly further reduce links or reject the association, and may create an association response that is sent to the STA).
It would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art at the time of invention to combine the teaching of HO with the teaching of Kneckt such that sending the request and receiving the information occur before the roaming as taught by Kneckt. The motivation for doing so would have been to form concurrent associations with multiple access point wireless devices in the system, which may help reduce delays and overhead from transitions between access point wireless devices within the system, and/or may support improved reliability and performance in the system, Kneckt, para. [0007].
Regarding claim 19, HO teaches all the subject matter of the method of claim 1, but does not appear to teach wherein the non-AP acquires a group transient key (GTK), integrity group transient key (IGTK), beacon integrity group transient key (BIGTK) of a roamed link with the second AP MLD.
In the same field of endeavor, Kneckt teaches the non-AP acquires a group transient key (GTK), integrity group transient key (IGTK), beacon integrity group transient key (BIGTK) of a roamed link with the second AP MLD (Kneckt, Fig. 23, para. [0150]: the non-AP may acquire GTK, IGTK, and BIGTK).
It would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art at the time of invention to combine the teaching of HO with the teaching of Kneckt such that the non-AP acquires a group transient key (GTK), integrity group transient key (IGTK), beacon integrity group transient key (BIGTK) of a roamed link with the second AP MLD as taught by Kneckt. The motivation for doing so would have been to form concurrent associations with multiple access point wireless devices in the system, which may help reduce delays and overhead from transitions between access point wireless devices within the system, and/or may support improved reliability and performance in the system, Kneckt, para. [0007].
Regarding claim 20, HO discloses all the subject matter of the method of claim 1, but does not appear to explicitly teach wherein the distributed AP MLD maintains sequence number spaces of unicast quality of service (QoS) data frames.
Kneckt discloses wherein the distributed AP MLD maintains sequence number spaces of unicast quality of service (QoS) data frames (Kneckt, para. 172: WLAN may have several possible sequence number (SN) spaces. QoS data may have a SN for each TID and direction (UL/DL). AP MAP wide SN may enable BA use in all links. The group addressed data frames may have unique SN within all links. Thus, a non-AP MAP may receive group data frames on any link).
It would have been it would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art at the time of invention to combine the teaching of HO with the teaching of Kneckt that discloses the distributed AP MLD maintains sequence number spaces of unicast quality of service (QoS) data frames. The motivation for doing so would have been to form concurrent associations with multiple access point wireless devices in the system, which may help reduce delays and overhead from transitions between access point wireless devices within the system, and/or may support improved reliability and performance in the system, Kneckt, para. [0007].
Regarding claim 21, HO and Kneckt teach all the subject matter of the method of claim 20, and further, teach wherein the distributed AP MLD performs duplication detection of unicast QoS data frames (Kneckt, Fig. 13, para. [0137]: show a possible AP MAP as the distributed AP MLD such that frames received on the receiver side via the multiple STAs may be provided to duplicate detection).
It would have been it would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art at the time of invention to combine the teaching of HO with the teaching of Kneckt that discloses the distributed AP MLD performs duplication detection of unicast QoS data frames. The motivation for doing so would have been to form concurrent associations with multiple access point wireless devices in the system, which may help reduce delays and overhead from transitions between access point wireless devices within the system, and/or may support improved reliability and performance in the system, Kneckt, para. [0007].
Regarding claim 22, HO and Kneckt teach all the subject matter of the method of claim 21, and further, teach wherein when roaming from the first AP MLD to the second AP MLD (Kneckt, Fig. 42, para. 157-159: non-AP MLD in roaming mode may roam from one AP MLD to another AP MLD in the plurality of AP MLDs), sequence number space information is transferred from the first AP MLD to the second AP MLD (Kneckt, Fig. 42, [0172]: Fig. 42 shows a table illustrating possible sequence number handling rules for such various SN spaces in a MAP system).
It would have been it would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art at the time of invention to combine the teaching of HO with the teaching of Kneckt that discloses when roaming from the first AP MLD to the second AP MLD, sequence number space information is transferred from the first AP MLD to the second AP MLD. The motivation for doing so would have been to form concurrent associations with multiple access point wireless devices in the system, which may help reduce delays and overhead from transitions between access point wireless devices within the system, and/or may support improved reliability and performance in the system, Kneckt, para. [0007].
Regarding claim 23, HO and Kneckt teach all the subject matter of the method of claim 22, and further, teach wherein a sequence number being used for next frame and receiver cache information are transferred from the first AP MLD to the second AP MLD (Kneckt, para. [0138]: the buffer (interpreted as cache information) can be transmitted from one AP MLD to another AP MLD).
It would have been it would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art at the time of invention to combine the teaching of HO with the teaching of Kneckt that discloses cache information are transferred from the first AP MLD to the second AP MLD. The motivation for doing so would have been to form concurrent associations with multiple access point wireless devices in the system, which may help reduce delays and overhead from transitions between access point wireless devices within the system, and/or may support improved reliability and performance in the system, Kneckt, para. [0007].
Regarding claim 24, HO and Kneckt teach all the subject matter of the method of claim 23, and further, teach wherein the Tx Window (WinStartO, WinSizeO), scoreboard context information, and reorder buffer information (WinStartR, WinSizeR, WinStartB, WinSizeB) are transferred from the first AP MLD to the second AP MLD (Kneckt, Fig. 36, para. [0167]: The router may release the reordered packets to the Internet. As another option, the DL TX buffer and/or the UL reorder buffer can be located in an AP MLD with active links with a STA. If this is the DL TX buffer location, the DL packets may be delivered directly to the AP MLD. This may reduce DL frame transmission delays. If this is the UL reorder buffer location, a non-AP MAP may send UL frames to a single AP MLD that performs UL reorder buffering. The AP MLD may send the reordered frames).
It would have been it would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art at the time of invention to combine the teaching of HO with the teaching of Kneckt that discloses reorder buffer information (WinStartR, WinSizeR, WinStartB, WinSizeB) are transferred from the first AP MLD to the second AP MLD. The motivation for doing so would have been to form concurrent associations with multiple access point wireless devices in the system, which may help reduce delays and overhead from transitions between access point wireless devices within the system, and/or may support improved reliability and performance in the system, Kneckt, para. [0007].
Allowable Subject Matter
19. Claims 16-18 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.
20. The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: The prior art of record fails to teach or suggest carrying out a key handshake that authenticates all link addresses of a reporting AP MLD, reported AP MLDs, AP MLD MAC service access point (SAP) addresses, and a distributed AP MLD MAC SAP address, as recited in the claims. Further, the prior art does not disclose authenticating all link addresses of the non-AP in combination with a MAC SAP address of the non-AP during the key handshake process. In addition, the prior arts of record do not teach or suggest calculating a pairwise transient key (PTK) based specifically on a MAC SAP address of the distributed AP MLD and a MAC SAP address of the non-AP. Instead, the prior art generally performs key establishment based on a single AP entity or individual link-level MAC addresses and does not address authentication and PTK derivation across multiple link addresses and distributed MAC SAP entities in a multi-link device (MLD) environment. Accordingly, the claimed combination of multi-link address authentication and PTK calculation based on distributed MAC SAP addresses is neither disclosed nor rendered obvious by the prior art.
Conclusion
21. The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
a) Ding et al. (US 2023/0180106 A1) discloses in the WLAN shown in FIG. 1, the access point device 1 is an access point multi-link device, and the non-access point device 4 is a non-access point multi-link device. When the non-access point device 4 needs to roam to an access point device that can meet a requirement for separately setting up a link on the 2.4 GHz frequency band and the 5 GHz frequency band, the non-access point device 4 determines, based on two groups of access point parameters provided by the access point device 1, that the AP 21 and the AP 22 belong to one device and the AP 31 belongs to another device, and then selects to set up a link with the AP 21 on the 2.4 GHz frequency band and set up a link with the AP 22 on the 5 GHz frequency band, that is, the non-access point device 4 roams to the access point device 2..
b) KATAR et al. (US 2024/0073739 A1) discloses transmits a basic service set (BSS) transition management (BTM) request frame indicating a subset of affiliated access points (APs) of an AP multi-link device (AP MLD). A device body is affiliated with the AP MLD and selectively transmits or refrains from transmission of a disassociation frame indicating a disassociation of an associated non-AP multi-link device (non-AP MLD) from the AP MLD based on whether a traffic identifier (TID)-to-link mapping (T2LM) request frame is received from a network entity affiliated with the associated non-AP MLD in response to the BTM request frame.
22. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JEAN F VOLTAIRE whose telephone number is (571)272-3953. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9:30-6:30 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, REBECCA E. SONG can be reached at (571)270-3667. 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.
/JEAN F VOLTAIRE/Examiner, Art Unit 2417
/REBECCA E SONG/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2417