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 .
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.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1, 3-5, 7-8, 10-11, 13-15, 17, 19, 21, 24, 26, 28 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1)-(a)(2) as being anticipated by Yang et al. (US Patent Application Publication No. 2019/0246351).
Regarding claim 1, Yang teaches an apparatus for wireless communication at an access point (AP) (Fig. 2 – AP 205), comprising:
a processing system (Fig. 17A – processing unit 1702) that includes processor circuitry (Fig. 16A – processor 1600) and memory circuitry (memory 1608) that stores code, the processing system configured to cause the apparatus to:
transmit a first frame comprising a first indication of a first beacon interval and a second indication of a second beacon interval (AP 205 transmits a first beacon frame to stations 210-218 indicating the times at which subsequent frames will be transmitted, thus the first beacon frame comprises at least first and second beacon intervals [Paragraphs 10-13, 23, 25]);
transmit a second frame at a first time associated with the first indication (thus, AP 205 transmits second frame at the first time established in the first frame [Paragraph 12]); and
transmit a third frame at a second time associated with the second indication (a third frame is then transmitted by AP 250 at the second time established in the first frame [Paragraph 13]).
Regarding claim 3, Yang further teaches the apparatus of claim 1, wherein the second indication comprises an indication of a multiple of the first beacon interval (second indication comprises multiples of the first beacon interval [Paragraphs 162, 166, 194, 205]).
Regarding claim 4, Yang further teaches the apparatus of claim 1, wherein the first frame further comprises a third indication of an update to the second beacon interval (update of the intervals is included in the frames [Paragraphs 167, 171, 174]).
Regarding claim 5, Yang further teaches the apparatus of claim 4, wherein the third indication comprises a counter associated with the update to the second beacon interval, the counter indicating a time for transmission of a fourth frame associated with the update to the second beacon interval (counter for updating the beacons is included [Paragraphs 168-169, 171]).
Regarding claim 7, Yang further teaches the apparatus of claim 4, wherein the processing system is further configured to cause the apparatus to:
receive, from a station, a request for an update to the second beacon interval, the first frame being transmitted in accordance with receipt of the request (updating of the beacons is received and used for transmission of all frames [Paragraph 221]).
Regarding claim 8, Yang further teaches the apparatus of claim 1, wherein the AP is associated with a first link of a multi-link device (MLD), and the first frame further comprises a third indication of an update to a third beacon interval associated with a second link of the MLD (APs 210-218 are MLD which are used for indicating which link is being used for the communication [Paragraphs 231, 244]).
Regarding claim 10, Yang further teaches the apparatus of claim 1, wherein the first frame further comprises an indication of an update to a beacon transmission period associated with the second beacon interval ([Paragraphs 167, 171]).
Regarding claims 11, 13-15, these claims are rejected as applied to claims 1, 3-5.
Regarding claim 17, Yang teaches an apparatus for wireless communications at a station (Fig. 2 – stations 210-218), comprising:
a processing system (Fig. 17A – processing unit 1702) that includes processor circuitry (Fig. 16A – processor 1600) and memory circuitry (memory 1608) that stores code, the processing system configured to cause the apparatus to:
receive, from an access point, a first frame comprising a first indication of a first beacon interval and a second indication of a second beacon interval (AP 205 transmits a first beacon frame to stations 210-218 indicating the times at which subsequent frames will be transmitted, thus the first beacon frame comprises at least first and second beacon intervals [Paragraphs 10-13, 23, 25]); and
receive, from the access point, a second frame at a first time associated with the second indication (thus, AP 205 transmits second frame at the first time established in the first frame [Paragraph 12]).
Regarding claim 19, Yang further teaches the apparatus of claim 17, wherein the first frame further comprises a third indication of an update to the second beacon interval ([Paragraphs 167, 171]), the third indication comprises a counter associated with the update to the second beacon interval ([Paragraph 171]), and the counter indicates a time for reception of a third frame associated with the update to the second beacon interval, from the access point ([Paragraphs 171, 221-222]).
Regarding claim 21, Yang further teaches the apparatus of claim 17, wherein the processing system is further configured to cause the apparatus to: transmit, to the access point, a request for an update to the second beacon interval, the first frame being received in accordance with receipt of the request by the access point (updating of the beacons is received and used for transmission of all frames [Paragraph 221]).
Regarding claims 24, 26, 28, these claims are rejected as applied to claims 17, 19, 21.
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 of this title, 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 2, 12, 18, 25 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yang et al. (US Patent Application Publication No. 2019/0246351) in view of Fang et al. (US Patent Application Publication No. 2018/0279209).
Regarding claim 2, Yang teaches all the limitations recited in claim 1.
However, Yang does not explicitly mention: wherein the first indication comprises a static beacon interval indication and the second indication comprises a dynamic beacon interval indication.
Fang teaches, in a similar field of endeavor of communication systems, the following:
wherein the first indication comprises a static beacon interval indication and the second indication comprises a dynamic beacon interval indication (for the disclosed system, the different indications for beacon transmissions comprise static beacon and dynamic beacon [Paragraph 39]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the communication system (as taught by Yang) with the implementation of static and dynamic beacons (as taught by Fang) for the purpose of synchronizing the network (Fang – Paragraph 5).
Regarding claim 12, this claim is rejected as applied to claim 2.
Regarding claim 18, Yang teaches all the limitations recited in claim 17.
However, Yang does not explicitly mention: wherein the first indication comprises a static beacon interval indication and the second indication comprises dynamic beacon interval indication.
Fang teaches, in a similar field of endeavor of communication systems, the following:
wherein the first indication comprises a static beacon interval indication and the second indication comprises dynamic beacon interval indication (for the disclosed system, the different indications for beacon transmissions comprise static beacon and dynamic beacon [Paragraph 39]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the communication system (as taught by Yang) with the implementation of static and dynamic beacons (as taught by Fang) for the purpose of synchronizing the network (Fang – Paragraph 5).
Regarding claim 25, this claim is rejected as applied to claim 18.
Claims 6, 16, 20, 27 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yang et al. (US Patent Application Publication No. 2019/0246351) in view of Atefi (US Patent Application Publication No. 2023/0039035).
Regarding claim 6, Yang teaches all the limitations recited in claim 4.
However, Yang does not explicitly mention: wherein the processing system is further configured to cause the apparatus to: receive a fifth frame from a station indicating a request to cancel the update to the second beacon interval; and refrain from updating the second beacon interval in association with the request.
Atefi teaches, in a similar field of endeavor of communication systems, the following:
wherein the processing system is further configured to cause the apparatus to: receive a fifth frame from a station indicating a request to cancel the update to the second beacon interval; and refrain from updating the second beacon interval in association with the request (for the disclosed system, different frames cancel update of the intervals and refrain updating other intervals [Paragraphs 24, 26, 40-43]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the communication system (as taught by Yang) with by refraining updates (as taught by Atefi) for the purpose of reducing latency (Atefi – Paragraph 3).
Regarding claim 16, this claim is rejected as applied to claim 6.
Regarding claim 20, Yang teaches all the limitations recited in claim 19.
However, Yang does not explicitly mention: wherein the processing system is further configured to cause the apparatus to: transmit, to the access point, a fifth frame indicating a request to cancel the update to the second beacon interval.
Atefi teaches, in a similar field of endeavor of communication systems, the following:
wherein the processing system is further configured to cause the apparatus to: transmit, to the access point, a fifth frame indicating a request to cancel the update to the second beacon interval (for the disclosed system, different frames cancel update of the intervals and refrain updating other intervals [Paragraphs 24, 26, 40-43]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the communication system (as taught by Yang) with by refraining updates (as taught by Atefi) for the purpose of reducing latency (Atefi – Paragraph 3).
Regarding claim 27, this claim is rejected as applied to claim 20.
Claim 9 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yang et al. (US Patent Application Publication No. 2019/0246351) in view of Ryu (US Patent Application Publication No. 2015/0305069).
Regarding claim 9, Yang teaches all the limitations recited in claim 1.
However, Yang does not explicitly mention: receive a probe request from a station while the access point has suspended beacon frame generation; and resume beacon frame generation in accordance with receipt of the probe request, the first frame being transmitted in accordance with receipt of the probe request.
Ryu teaches, in a similar field of endeavor of communication systems, the following:
receive a probe request from a station while the access point has suspended beacon frame generation; and resume beacon frame generation in accordance with receipt of the probe request, the first frame being transmitted in accordance with receipt of the probe request (for the disclosed system, beacon suspension is performed and resumed in accordance with probe request so that transmission of the frame is based on the request [Paragraphs 5-6, 40, 42]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the communication system (as taught by Yang) with beacons suspension (as taught by Ryu) for the purpose of supporting communication (Ryu – Paragraph 2).
Claims 22-23, 29-30 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yang et al. (US Patent Application Publication No. 2019/0246351) in view of Fang (Fang2) et al. (US Patent Application Publication No. 2014/0071821).
Regarding claim 22, Yang teaches all the limitations recited in claim 17.
However, Yang does not explicitly mention: wherein the first frame further comprises an indication of an update to a beacon transmission period associated with the second beacon interval, and the processing system is further configured to cause the apparatus to: enter a low power state after the beacon transmission period has expired following a time associated with the second indication without receipt of a third frame associated with the second indication.
Fang2 teaches, in a similar field of endeavor of communication systems, the following:
wherein the first frame further comprises an indication of an update to a beacon transmission period associated with the second beacon interval, and the processing system is further configured to cause the apparatus to: enter a low power state after the beacon transmission period has expired following a time associated with the second indication without receipt of a third frame associated with the second indication (for the disclosed system, low power state is entered after beacon transmission has expired for time association [Paragraphs 43-50, 54, 72, 76]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the communication system (as taught by Yang) transmission of beacons (as taught by Fang2) for the purpose of synchronizing the network (Fang2 – Paragraph 4).
Regarding claim 23, Yang teaches all the limitations recited in claim 17.
However, Yang does not explicitly mention: refrain from performing passive scanning during a first time period; determine a distance between the station and the access point is below a threshold distance; and transmit, to the access point after the first time period, a third frame in accordance with the determination that the distance between the station and the access point is below the threshold distance, the first frame being received in accordance with the third frame.
Fang2 teaches, in a similar field of endeavor of communication systems, the following:
refrain from performing passive scanning during a first time period; determine a distance between the station and the access point is below a threshold distance; and transmit, to the access point after the first time period, a third frame in accordance with the determination that the distance between the station and the access point is below the threshold distance, the first frame being received in accordance with the third frame (for the disclosed system, distances between stations are considered when under threshold and thus modifying the transmission of the beacons [Paragraphs 43-50, 54, 72, 76]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the communication system (as taught by Yang) transmission of beacons (as taught by Fang2) for the purpose of synchronizing the network (Fang2 – Paragraph 4).
Regarding claims 29-30, these claims are rejected as applied to claims 22-23.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to FABRICIO R MURILLO GARCIA whose telephone number is (571)270-5708. The examiner can normally be reached 9-5pm.
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, Sam K Ahn can be reached at 5712723044. 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.
April 17, 2026
/FABRICIO R MURILLO GARCIA/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2633
Prosecution Insights