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 office action is a response to an application filed on 01/16/2026 in which claims 1-6, 8-17 and 19-22 are pending. Claims 7 and 18 were cancelled.
Response to Amendment
Applicant’s Arguments/Remarks filed on 01/16/2026 with respect to independent claim 1 have been fully considered. Based on the amendments to the claims, further consideration and search were performed resulting in a new ground(s) of rejection presented below. The claims have not overcome the claim rejections as shown below.
Claims 1-6, 8-17 and 19-22 are pending.
Claims 7 and 18 were cancelled.
Response to Arguments
Regarding amended independent claim 1, Applicant argues that the claim feature “wherein the times are stored in the first packet as distinct values” is in clear contrast to Moon, which only teaches that the Ethernet frame includes the difference between TB2 and TB1, and not the actual values of TB2 and TB1 themselves.
Based on the amendments to the claim, further search was conducted resulting in the new ground of rejection presented below. The newly found prior art of Khoury et al. (US 2012/0136956) discloses the amended feature of claim 1 as shown below in the Office Action.
Therefore, the amended independent claim 1 is rendered unpatentable. Independent claim 16 recites similar distinguishing features as claim 1, thus is also rendered unpatentable. As a result the features of the claims are shown by the cited references as set forth below.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
Claims 1-2, 8, 12-14, 16 and 22 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Haartsen (U.S. Patent No. 6,574,266) in view of Khoury et al. (US 2012/0136956), hereinafter “Khoury”.
As to claim 1, Haartsen teaches a method comprising:
receiving, by a first device via a wireless network, first timing information associated with a second device and a first channel hopping sequence associated with the second device (Haartsen, Figs. 7A-7D, col 11 ln 18-21, “After terminal 250 locks to base station 210, terminal 250 transmits to base station 210 the timing and frequency hop sequence terminal 250 uses for its page scanning procedure”. The base station receives the timing and frequency hop sequence associated with the terminal 250); and
transmitting, by the first device via the wireless network, the first timing information and the first channel hopping sequence in a first packet (Haartsen, Figs. 7A-7D, col 11 ln 30-33, “Base station 210 may then convey to terminal 240 the timing and frequency hop sequence terminal 250 uses for its page scanning process”. The base station transmits the timing and frequency hop sequence of the terminal 250 to terminal 240. Col 10 ln 27-38, the base station communicates with the terminal via packet transmissions).
Haartsen teaches the claimed limitations as stated above. Haartsen does not explicitly teach the following features: regarding claim 1, where the first packet comprises:
a time at the first device at which the first device transmits the first packet;
a time at the second device; and
a time at the first device when the first device determined the time at the second device,
wherein the times are stored in the first packet as distinct values.
However, Khoury teaches where the first packet comprises:
a time at the first device at which the first device transmits the first packet (Khoury, Fig. 7, [0071], the MELDED response message includes the timestamp t1, where the master clock transmits the MELDED response message at t1);
a time at the second device (Khoury, Fig. 7, [0071], the MELDED response message includes the timestamp t3, which the time at which the TIMING REQUEST message was generated (and transmitted) at the slave clock); and
a time at the first device when the first device determined the time at the second device (Khoury, Fig. 7, [0071], the MELDED response message includes the timestamp t4, which is time of reception of the TIMING REQUEST message at the master clock. The time t3 of the slave clock is obtained by the master clock at time t4),
wherein the times are stored in the first packet as distinct values (Khoury, Fig. 7, [0071], the MELDED response message includes the timestamps t1, t3 and t4).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the invention of Haartsen to have the features, as taught by Khoury in order to eliminate the need to conduct additional operations to find and correlate the timestamps associated with the outgoing and incoming messages. Also, to eliminate the possibility of incorrect pairing of timestamps and, thus, improving the reliability of synchronization operations (Khoury, [0071]).
As to claim 2, Haartsen teaches wherein transmitting the first timing information and the first channel hopping sequence comprises using a broadcast message via the wireless network (Haartsen, Figs. 7A-7D, col 10 ln 61-65, “transmitted by the base station 210 on a broadcast channel 280, with the beacon signal carrying, for example, the base station's identity, and other system information and paging information and supporting remote terminal requests for channels”, col 11 ln 30-33, “Base station 210 may then convey to terminal 240 the timing and frequency hop sequence terminal 250 uses for its page scanning process”. The beacon transmitted in the broadcast channel is used for the paging information which includes the timing and frequency hop sequence terminal 250 uses for its page scanning process).
As to claim 8, Haartsen teaches further comprising:
receiving, by a third device, the first packet (Haartsen, Figs. 7A-7D, col 11 ln 30-33, “Base station 210 may then convey to terminal 240 the timing and frequency hop sequence terminal 250 uses for its page scanning process”. The base station transmits the timing and frequency hop sequence of the terminal 250 to terminal 240); and
using, by the third device, a content of the first packet to communicate with the second device via the wireless network (Haartsen, Figs. 7A-7D, col 11 ln 33-40, “Terminal 240 may then transmit a page message to request a direct connection with terminal 250 at the correct time and using the appropriate frequency hop sequence, thereby reducing the set-up time required to establish the ad-hoc connection between terminal 240 and 250. When this paging procedure is successful, terminals 240 and 250 establish a direct full-duplex link as depicted in FIG. 7C”. The terminal 240 requests a direct connection and communicates with the terminal 250 using the correct time and appropriate frequency hop sequence of the terminal 250).
As to claim 12, Haartsen teaches wherein the second device is a sleepy node (Haartsen, Fig. 7A, col 10 ln 54-60, “The setup process for an ad hoc communication session in accordance with Applicants' invention can be described in connection with the system diagram depicted in FIGS. 7A, 7B, 7C and the method depicted in FIG. 9. Beginning in an idle mode depicted by FIG. 7A, remote terminals 240, 250 are locked to a base station 210 as indicated by the dashed lines 280”. The terminal 250 begins in idle mode (Fig. 7A)).
As to claim 13, Haartsen teaches wherein the second device is a non-sleepy node (Haartsen, col 6 ln 1-3, “Typically, a FH radio unit in standby or idle sleeps most of the time, but periodically listens to a selected hop channel for a page message”, Fig. 7A, col 10 ln 54-60, “Beginning in an idle mode depicted by FIG. 7A, remote terminals 240, 250 are locked to a base station 210 as indicated by the dashed lines 280”, col 11 ln 14-17, “Suppose that the terminal 240 wants to connect to the terminal 250. As part of its normal mode of operation, terminal 250 periodically wakes up and scans for page request messages from other terminals”. The terminal 250 wakes up from its idle state).
As to claim 14, Haartsen teaches wherein the first device is a non-sleepy node (Haartsen, col 11 ln 17-33, “After terminal 250 locks to base station 210, terminal 250 transmits to base station 210 the timing and frequency hop sequence terminal 250 uses for its page scanning procedure. It will be noted that terminal 250 need only transmit this information once, which may be done when terminal 250 locks to base station 210. At this time, terminal 250 may also convey additional information required for registration with base station 210. When terminal 240 wants to connect to terminal 250, terminal 240 first requests a communication link to base station 210, for example by a suitable exchange of messages. Once this full duplex link 281 is established, the terminal 240 can then send a request message to the base station 210 that requests a connection to the terminal 250. Base station 210 may then convey to terminal 240 the timing and frequency hop sequence terminal 250 uses for its page scanning process”. The base station is receiving information from the terminals 250 and 240, and transmitting information to the terminal 240).
As to claim 16, Haartsen teaches a method comprising:
receiving, by a first device and from a second device via a wireless network, first timing information associated with a third device, and a first hopping sequence associated with the third device in a first packet (Haartsen, Figs. 7A-7D, col 11 ln 30-33, “Base station 210 may then convey to terminal 240 the timing and frequency hop sequence terminal 250 uses for its page scanning process”. The terminal 240 receives from the base station the timing and frequency hop sequence of the terminal 250); and
using, by the first device, the first timing information and the first hopping sequence to communicate with the third device via the wireless network (Haartsen, Figs. 7A-7D, col 11 ln 33-40, “Terminal 240 may then transmit a page message to request a direct connection with terminal 250 at the correct time and using the appropriate frequency hop sequence, thereby reducing the set-up time required to establish the ad-hoc connection between terminal 240 and 250. When this paging procedure is successful, terminals 240 and 250 establish a direct full-duplex link as depicted in FIG. 7C”. The terminal 240 uses the correct time and appropriate frequency hop to communicate with terminal 250).
Haartsen teaches the claimed limitations as stated above. Haartsen does not explicitly teach the following features: regarding claim 16, wherein the first packet comprises:
a time at the second device at which the second device transmits the first packet;
a time at the third device; and
a time at the second device when the second device determined the time at the third device, wherein the times are stored in the first packet as distinct values.
However, Khoury teaches wherein the first packet comprises:
a time at the second device at which the second device transmits the first packet (Khoury, Fig. 7, [0071], the MELDED response message includes the timestamp t1, where the master clock transmits the MELDED response message at t1);
a time at the third device (Khoury, Fig. 7, [0071], the MELDED response message includes the timestamp t3, which the time at which the TIMING REQUEST message was generated (and transmitted) at the slave clock); and
a time at the second device when the second device determined the time at the third device (Khoury, Fig. 7, [0071], the MELDED response message includes the timestamp t4, which is time of reception of the TIMING REQUEST message at the master clock. The time t3 of the slave clock is obtained by the master clock at time t4), wherein the times are stored in the first packet as distinct values (Khoury, Fig. 7, [0071], the MELDED response message includes the timestamps t1, t3 and t4).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the invention of Haartsen to have the features, as taught by Khoury in order to eliminate the need to conduct additional operations to find and correlate the timestamps associated with the outgoing and incoming messages. Also, to eliminate the possibility of incorrect pairing of timestamps and, thus, improving the reliability of synchronization operations (Khoury, [0071]).
As to claim 22, Haartsen teaches wherein transmitting the first timing information and the first channel hopping sequence in the first packet comprises transmitting the first packet to a third device (Haartsen, Figs. 7A-7D, col 11 ln 30-33, “Base station 210 may then convey to terminal 240 the timing and frequency hop sequence terminal 250 uses for its page scanning process”. The base station transmits the timing and frequency hop sequence of the terminal 250 to terminal 240) according to a channel hopping sequence of the third device (Haartsen, col 11 ln 1-4, the terminals locked to the base station determine the corresponding hop sequence they should follow and maintain synchronization. Col 11 ln 30-40, the communication is performed using the appropriate frequency hop sequence).
Claim 3 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Haartsen (U.S. Patent No. 6,574,266) in view of Khoury et al. (US 2012/0136956), hereinafter “Khoury” and further in view of Vijayasankar et al. (US 2017/0310358), hereinafter “Vijayasankar”.
Haartsen and Khoury teach the claimed limitations as stated above. Haartsen and Khoury do not explicitly teach the following features: regarding claim 3, wherein transmitting the first timing information and the first channel hopping sequence comprises using a unicast message via the wireless network.
As to claim 3, Vijayasankar teaches wherein transmitting the first timing information and the first channel hopping sequence comprises using a unicast message via the wireless network (Vijayasankar, Figs. 2A-2B, [0031], “the SN receiving from the CN an AHS frame that includes the CN's hopping sequence and the CN's initial timing position within the hopping sequence”, [0040], “In the FIG. 2B timeline, at a time shown as 251, the CN transmits frame(s) along with additional information as information elements (IE)s. IE are a MAC frame ‘unit’ which can be used to carry additional information apart from payload data. A special IE which may be called a timing IE, is generally used by the CN in the AHS frame in step 201 to carry the timing information of its current position within its hopping sequence at that time”, [0043], “The data request command frame is transmitted as a unicast transmission”. The AHS includes time and hopping information of the CN and is transmitted to the SN. Similar to the data request command frame transmitted as a unicast transmission, the transmission in 251 is a unicast transmission between the CN and the SN).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the invention of Haartsen and Khoury to have the features, as taught by Vijayasankar in order to allow for the use of any implementation specific hopping sequence on SN (Vijayasankar, [0050]).
Claims 4, 9-10, 19 and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Haartsen (U.S. Patent No. 6,574,266) in view of Khoury et al. (US 2012/0136956), hereinafter “Khoury” and further in view of Moon et al. (US 2020/0053678), hereinafter “Moon”.
Haartsen and Khoury teach the claimed limitations as stated above. Haartsen and Khoury do not explicitly teach the following features: regarding claim 4, wherein the first packet further includes second timing information associated with the first device.
As to claim 4, Moon teaches wherein the first packet further includes second timing information associated with the first device (Moon, Fig. 6, [0077], “The TSN bridge network may record the calculated residence time (TB2-TB) to a correction field of the corresponding Ethernet frame”. The TSN bridge records timing information associated with the TSN bridge and the delay measurement in addition to the timestamps values).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the invention of Haartsen and Khoury to have the features, as taught by Moon in order to enhance the accuracy of clock synchronization between nodes (Moon, [0077]).
Haartsen teaches the claimed limitations as stated above. Haartsen does not explicitly teach the following features: regarding claim 9, wherein the time at the second device is a first time at the second device, further comprising calculating, by the third device, a second time at the second device based on the first time at the second device and the time at the first device when the first device determined the first time at the second device.
As to claim 9, Khoury teaches wherein the time at the second device is a first time at the second device (Khoury, Fig. 7, [0071], the MELDED response message includes the timestamp t3, which the time at which the TIMING REQUEST message was generated (and transmitted) at the slave clock. The time t3 a first time at the slave clock).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the invention of Haartsen to have the features, as taught by Khoury in order to eliminate the need to conduct additional operations to find and correlate the timestamps associated with the outgoing and incoming messages. Also, to eliminate the possibility of incorrect pairing of timestamps and, thus, improving the reliability of synchronization operations (Khoury, [0071]).
Haartsen and Khoury teach the claimed limitations as stated above. Haartsen and Khoury do not explicitly teach the following features: regarding claim 9, further comprising calculating, by the third device, a second time at the second device based on the first time at the second device and the time at the first device when the first device determined the first time at the second device.
However, Moon teaches further comprising calculating, by the third device, a second time at the second device based on the first time at the second device and the time at the first device when the first device determined the first time at the second device (Moon, Fig. 6, [0077]-[0078], the slave 620 determines its clock to be synchronized with the clock of the master based on the master timestamp T1 and the delay time d that includes time TB1 at which the frame is received from the master node).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the invention of Haartsen and Khoury to have the features, as taught by Moon in order to enhance the accuracy of clock synchronization between nodes (Moon, [0077]).
Haartsen and Khoury teach the claimed limitations as stated above. Haartsen and Khoury do not explicitly teach the following features: regarding claim 10, wherein calculating the time of the second device comprises calculating the time of the second device based on a difference between the time at the second device and the time at the first device when the first device determined the time at the second device.
As to claim 10, Moon teaches wherein calculating the time of the second device comprises calculating the time of the second device based on a difference between the time at the second device and the time at the first device when the first device determined the time at the second device (Moon, Fig. 6, [0077]-[0078], the slave 620 determines its clock to be synchronized with the clock of the master based on the master timestamp T1 and the delay time d that includes time TB1 at which the frame is received from the master node. As shown in Fig. 6, the time delay includes Delay(T1) which is the difference between TB1 and T1).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the invention of Haartsen and Khoury to have the features, as taught by Moon in order to enhance the accuracy of clock synchronization between nodes (Moon, [0077]).
Haartsen teaches the claimed limitations as stated above. Haartsen does not explicitly teach the following features: regarding claim 19, wherein the time at the third device is a first time at the third device, further comprising calculating, by the first device, a second time at the third device based on the first time at the third device and the time at the second device when the second device determined the first time at the third device.
As to claim 19, Khoury teaches wherein the time at the third device is a first time at the third device (Khoury, Fig. 7, [0071], the MELDED response message includes the timestamp t3, which the time at which the TIMING REQUEST message was generated (and transmitted) at the slave clock. The time t3 a first time at the slave clock).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the invention of Haartsen to have the features, as taught by Khoury in order to eliminate the need to conduct additional operations to find and correlate the timestamps associated with the outgoing and incoming messages. Also, to eliminate the possibility of incorrect pairing of timestamps and, thus, improving the reliability of synchronization operations (Khoury, [0071]).
Haartsen and Khoury teach the claimed limitations as stated above. Haartsen and Khoury do not explicitly teach the following features: regarding claim 19, further comprising calculating, by the first device, a second time at the third device based on the first time at the third device and the time at the second device when the second device determined the first time at the third device.
However, Moon teaches further comprising calculating, by the first device, a second time at the third device based on the first time at the third device and the time at the second device when the second device determined the first time at the third device (Moon, Fig. 6, [0077]-[0078], the slave 620 determines its clock to be synchronized with the clock of the master based on the master timestamp T1 and the delay time d that includes time TB1 at which the frame is received from the master node).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the invention of Haartsen and Khoury to have the features, as taught by Moon in order to enhance the accuracy of clock synchronization between nodes (Moon, [0077]).
Haartsen and Khoury teach the claimed limitations as stated above. Haartsen and Khoury do not explicitly teach the following features: regarding claim 20, wherein calculating the time of the third device comprises calculating the time of the third device based on a difference between the time at the third device and the time at the second device when the second device determined the time at the third device.
As to claim 20, Moon teaches wherein calculating the time of the third device comprises calculating the time of the third device based on a difference between the time at the third device and the time at the second device when the second device determined the time at the third device (Moon, Fig. 6, [0077]-[0078], the slave 620 determines its clock to be synchronized with the clock of the master based on the master timestamp T1 and the delay time d that includes time TB1 at which the frame is received from the master node. As shown in Fig. 6, the time delay includes Delay(T1) which is the difference between TB1 and T1).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the invention of Haartsen and Khoury to have the features, as taught by Moon in order to enhance the accuracy of clock synchronization between nodes (Moon, [0077]).
Claims 5-6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Haartsen (U.S. Patent No. 6,574,266) in view of Khoury et al. (US 2012/0136956), hereinafter “Khoury” and further in view of IEEE Std 802.15.4e™-2012, “IEEE Standard for Local and metropolitan area networks— Part 15.4: Low-Rate Wireless Personal Area Networks (LR-WPANs) Amendment 1: MAC sublayer” (provided in the IDS), hereinafter “IEEE”.
Haartsen and Khoury teach the claimed limitations as stated above. Haartsen and Khoury do not explicitly teach the following features: regarding claim 5, wherein the first timing information in included in a header of the first packet.
As to claim 5, IEEE teaches wherein the first timing information in included in a header of the first packet (IEEE, page 65, “the enhanced beacon contains header and/or payload IEs, refer to 5.2.4 for further details”, Table 3b, “Header DSME PAN Descriptor (5.2.4.9)…MLME Payload Channel Hopping Sequence (5.2.4.16) and Hopping Timing (5.2.4.17)”. Page 85, Section 5.2.4.9, the DSME PAN Descriptor IE includes the time synchronization specification and channel hopping specification (see also pages 86-87)).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the invention of Haartsen and Khoury to have the features, as taught by IEEE in order to provide robustness and high reliability even in dynamic channel conditions (IEEE, page 200, I.4.1.1 Features).
Haartsen and Khoury teach the claimed limitations as stated above. Haartsen and Khoury do not explicitly teach the following features: regarding claim 6, wherein the first timing information and the first channel hopping sequence are included in a payload of the first packet.
As to claim 6, IEEE teaches wherein the first timing information and the first channel hopping sequence are included in a payload of the first packet (IEEE, page 65, “the enhanced beacon contains header and/or payload IEs, refer to 5.2.4 for further details”, Table 3b, “MLME Payload Channel Hopping Sequence (5.2.4.16) and Hopping Timing (5.2.4.17)”.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the invention of Haartsen and Khoury to have the features, as taught by IEEE in order to provide robustness and high reliability even in dynamic channel conditions (IEEE, page 200, I.4.1.1 Features).
Claims 11 and 17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Haartsen (U.S. Patent No. 6,574,266) in view of Khoury et al. (US 2012/0136956), hereinafter “Khoury” and further in view of Lin et al. (US 2015/0351020), hereinafter “Lin”.
As to claim 11, Haartsen teaches wherein using, by the third device, content of the first packet to communicate with the second device comprises using content of the first packet to communicate with the second device (Haartsen, Figs. 7A-7D, col 11 ln 33-40, “Terminal 240 may then transmit a page message to request a direct connection with terminal 250 at the correct time and using the appropriate frequency hop sequence, thereby reducing the set-up time required to establish the ad-hoc connection between terminal 240 and 250. When this paging procedure is successful, terminals 240 and 250 establish a direct full-duplex link as depicted in FIG. 7C”. The terminal 240 requests a direct connection and communicates with the terminal 250 using the correct time and appropriate frequency hop sequence of the terminal 250).
Haartsen and Khoury teach the claimed limitations as stated above. Haartsen and Khoury do not explicitly teach the following features: regarding claim 11, communicate with the second device in response to the first device being unavailable.
However, Lin teaches communicate with the second device in response to the first device being unavailable (Lin, [0045], the terminal enables D2D communication according to network information when a base station is unavailable in case of a disaster).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the invention of Haartsen and Khoury to have the features, as taught by Lin in order to solve problems caused by the fact that a base station is unavailable in a case of a disaster and requirements of a public security scenario are met (Lin, [0045]).
As to claim 17, Haartsen teaches further comprising communicating, by the first device, with the third device using the first timing information and the first hopping sequence (Haartsen, Figs. 7A-7D, col 11 ln 33-40, “Terminal 240 may then transmit a page message to request a direct connection with terminal 250 at the correct time and using the appropriate frequency hop sequence, thereby reducing the set-up time required to establish the ad-hoc connection between terminal 240 and 250. When this paging procedure is successful, terminals 240 and 250 establish a direct full-duplex link as depicted in FIG. 7C”. The terminal 240 requests a direct connection and communicates with the terminal 250 using the correct time and appropriate frequency hop sequence of the terminal 250).
Haartsen and Khoury teach the claimed limitations as stated above. Haartsen and Khoury do not explicitly teach the following features: regarding claim 17, further comprising communicating, by the first device, with the third device in response to the second device being unavailable.
However, Lin teaches further comprising communicating, by the first device, with the third device in response to the second device being unavailable (Lin, [0045], the terminal enables D2D communication according to network information when a base station is unavailable in case of a disaster).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the invention of Haartsen and Khoury to have the features, as taught by Lin in order to solve problems caused by the fact that a base station is unavailable in a case of a disaster and requirements of a public security scenario are met (Lin, [0045]).
Claims 15 and 21 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Haartsen (U.S. Patent No. 6,574,266) in view of Khoury et al. (US 2012/0136956), hereinafter “Khoury” and further in view of Trompower et al. (U.S. Patent No.6,088,591), hereinafter “Trompower”.
As to claim 15, Haartsen teaches further comprising:
receiving, by a third device via the wireless network, the first timing information and the first channel hopping sequence (Haartsen, Figs. 7A-7D, col 11 ln 30-33, “Base station 210 may then convey to terminal 240 the timing and frequency hop sequence terminal 250 uses for its page scanning process”. The base station transmits the timing and frequency hop sequence of the terminal 250 to terminal 240);
receiving, by the third device, second timing information associated with a fourth device and a second channel hopping sequence associated with the fourth device (Haartsen, col 3 ln 40-42, “To improve efficiency, terminals should communicate with other terminals directly if possible, forming direct "ad hoc" connections, i.e., connections that do not involve relaying by a base station all of the information to be exchanged”, Figs. 7A-7D, col 11 ln 30-33, “Base station 210 may then convey to terminal 240 the timing and frequency hop sequence terminal 250 uses for its page scanning process”. Terminals communicate with other terminals. This indicate that the terminal 240 receives timing and frequency hop sequence information from other terminals in addition to terminal 250);
communicating, by the third device, with the second device using the first timing information and the first channel hopping sequence (Haartsen, Figs. 7A-7D, col 11 ln 33-40, “Terminal 240 may then transmit a page message to request a direct connection with terminal 250 at the correct time and using the appropriate frequency hop sequence, thereby reducing the set-up time required to establish the ad-hoc connection between terminal 240 and 250. When this paging procedure is successful, terminals 240 and 250 establish a direct full-duplex link as depicted in FIG. 7C”. The terminal 240 requests a direct connection and communicates with the terminal 250 using the correct time and appropriate frequency hop sequence of the terminal 250); and
communicating, by the third device, with the fourth device using the second timing information and the second hopping sequence (Haartsen, , col 3 ln 40-42, “To improve efficiency, terminals should communicate with other terminals directly if possible, forming direct "ad hoc" connections, i.e., connections that do not involve relaying by a base station all of the information to be exchanged”, Figs. 7A-7D, col 11 ln 33-40, “Terminal 240 may then transmit a page message to request a direct connection with terminal 250 at the correct time and using the appropriate frequency hop sequence, thereby reducing the set-up time required to establish the ad-hoc connection between terminal 240 and 250. When this paging procedure is successful, terminals 240 and 250 establish a direct full-duplex link as depicted in FIG. 7C”. Terminals communicate with other terminals. This indicate that the terminal 240 receives timing and frequency hop sequence information from other terminals in addition to terminal 250, in order to directly communicate with the other terminals).
Haartsen and Khoury teach the claimed limitations as stated above. Haartsen and Khoury do not explicitly teach the following features: regarding claim 15, storing, by the third device, the first and second timing information and the first and second channel hopping sequences in a memory of the third device.
However, Trompower teaches storing, by the third device, the first and second timing information and the first and second channel hopping sequences in a memory of the third device (Trompower, Fig. 11, col 18 ln 34-35, “table 320 which is stored in the memory 210 of each mobile terminal 166”, col 18 ln 50-57, “As shown in FIG. 11, each entry includes a base station identification address 300 and a hopping sequence 302 identical to that included in the roaming table 296. The time stamp 304 has the same format as the time stamp in the roaming table 296; however, the information is updated to reflect the hopping sequence position at the time the time stamp information is sent to the mobile terminal 166 as described below”. The UE includes a memory for storing time stamps 304 and hopping sequences 302 of different stations);
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the invention of Haartsen and Khoury to have the features, as taught by Trompower in order to jump immediately to the channel which the base stations are likely to be at and attempt to lock on using either passive or active scanning techniques, thereby avoiding the necessity of scanning through several different channels essentially at random before receiving a beacon or probe response packet allowing the mobile terminal to lock on (Trompower, col 9 ln 47-59).
As to claim 21, Haartsen teaches further comprising:
receiving, by the first device, second timing information associated with a fourth device and a second hopping sequence associated with the fourth device (Haartsen, col 3 ln 40-42, “To improve efficiency, terminals should communicate with other terminals directly if possible, forming direct "ad hoc" connections, i.e., connections that do not involve relaying by a base station all of the information to be exchanged”, Figs. 7A-7D, col 11 ln 30-33, “Base station 210 may then convey to terminal 240 the timing and frequency hop sequence terminal 250 uses for its page scanning process”. Terminals communicate with other terminals. This indicate that the terminal 240 receives timing and frequency hop sequence information from other terminals in addition to terminal 250); and
communicating, by the first device, with the fourth device using the second timing information and the second hopping sequence (Haartsen, , col 3 ln 40-42, “To improve efficiency, terminals should communicate with other terminals directly if possible, forming direct "ad hoc" connections, i.e., connections that do not involve relaying by a base station all of the information to be exchanged”, Figs. 7A-7D, col 11 ln 33-40, “Terminal 240 may then transmit a page message to request a direct connection with terminal 250 at the correct time and using the appropriate frequency hop sequence, thereby reducing the set-up time required to establish the ad-hoc connection between terminal 240 and 250. When this paging procedure is successful, terminals 240 and 250 establish a direct full-duplex link as depicted in FIG. 7C”. Terminals communicate with other terminals. This indicate that the terminal 240 receives timing and frequency hop sequence information from other terminals in addition to terminal 250, in order to directly communicate with the other terminals).
Haartsen and Khoury teach the claimed limitations as stated above. and Khoury do not explicitly teach the following features: regarding claim 21, storing, by the first device, the first and second timing information and the first and second hopping sequences in a memory of the first device.
However, Trompower teaches storing, by the first device, the first and second timing information and the first and second hopping sequences in a memory of the first device (Trompower, Fig. 11, col 18 ln 34-35, “table 320 which is stored in the memory 210 of each mobile terminal 166”, col 18 ln 50-57, “As shown in FIG. 11, each entry includes a base station identification address 300 and a hopping sequence 302 identical to that included in the roaming table 296. The time stamp 304 has the same format as the time stamp in the roaming table 296; however, the information is updated to reflect the hopping sequence position at the time the time stamp information is sent to the mobile terminal 166 as described below”. The UE includes a memory for storing time stamps 304 and hopping sequences 302 of different stations);
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the invention of Haartsen and Khoury to have the features, as taught by Trompower in order to jump immediately to the channel which the base stations are likely to be at and attempt to lock on using either passive or active scanning techniques, thereby avoiding the necessity of scanning through several different channels essentially at random before receiving a beacon or probe response packet allowing the mobile terminal to lock on (Trompower, col 9 ln 47-59).
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to RICARDO H CASTANEYRA whose telephone number is (571)272-2486. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9:00am - 5:30pm.
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, Kwang bin Yao can be reached at 571-272-3182. 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.
/RICARDO H CASTANEYRA/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2473