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)(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. Claim(s) 1-5, 7, 10-15,19-22, 26-30 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Chu (Pub No 20250056595) Regarding claim 1 and 26 , Chu teaches a first wireless communication device, comprising: a processing system that includes processor circuitry and memory circuitry that stores code, the processing system configured to cause the first wireless communication device to: (see processor memory para [0118]) receive, from a second wireless communication device, a first physical layer protocol data unit that indicates an allocation of a first resource unit for a preemption indication associated with low latency data, wherein the allocation of the first resource unit is within a transmission opportunity associated with the second wireless communication device; (interpreted as DL PDDU 1 + PR (preemption request) enabled, see fig. 2b . Also see For EDCA-based preemption, an AP grants low-latency (LL) devices an opportunity to contend within its DL TXOP , see para [0074] . Also see Preemption Request (PR) Enabled field with the following values: [0081] 00: Preemption Request is disallowed (or disabled) [0082] 01: Preemption Request is allowed (or enabled) a SIFS after the PPDU [0083] 10: Preemption Request is allowed (or enabled) a SIFS after the immediate response frame [0084] 11: reserved , see para [0080]) ) transmit, via the first resource unit indicated by the first physical layer protocol data unit, the preemption indication associated with low latency data based at least in part on low latency data information at the first wireless communication device, wherein transmission of the preemption indication is after an end of the first physical layer protocol data unit and before a scheduled start time for a second physical layer protocol data unit from the second wireless communication device; and (interpreted as preemption traffic indication (PRI), from the STA to the AP see fig. 2b. Also see after DL PDDU 1 fig. 2b) and before start time of DL PPDU 2 fig. 2b ) transmit, in accordance with the preemption indication, a third physical layer protocol data unit comprising the low latency data information, wherein the third physical layer protocol data unit preempts the second physical layer protocol data unit within the transmission opportunity. (interpreted as SU PPDU transmission UL low-latency (LL) from the STA to the AP, see fig 2b) Regarding claim 14, Chu teaches a second wireless communication device, comprising: a processing system that includes processor circuitry and memory circuitry that stores code, the processing system configured to cause the second wireless communication device to: transmit a first physical layer protocol data unit comprising a broadcast resource unit and one or more dedicated resource units, wherein a trigger frame transmitted via the broadcast resource unit indicates an allocation of a first resource unit for a preemption indication associated with low latency data, and wherein the allocation of the first resource unit is within a transmission opportunity associated with the second wireless communication device; (interpreted as DL PDDU 1 + PR (preemption request) enabled, see fig. 2b. Also see For EDCA-based preemption, an AP grants low-latency (LL) devices an opportunity to contend within its DL TXOP , see para [0074]. Also see Preemption Request (PR) Enabled field with the following values: [0081] 00: Preemption Request is disallowed (or disabled) [0082] 01: Preemption Request is allowed (or enabled) a SIFS after the PPDU [0083] 10: Preemption Request is allowed (or enabled) a SIFS after the immediate response frame [0084] 11: reserved , see para [0080])) receive, from a first wireless communication device via the first resource unit indicated by the trigger frame, a preemption indication associated with low latency data, wherein reception of the preemption indication is after an end of the first physical layer protocol data unit and before a scheduled start time for a second physical layer protocol data unit from the second wireless communication device; and (interpreted as preemption traffic indication (PRI), from the STA to the AP see fig. 2b. Also see after DL PDDU 1 fig. 2b) and before start time of DL PPDU 2 fig. 2b) receive, from the first wireless communication device and in accordance with the preemption indication, a third physical layer protocol data unit, wherein the third physical layer protocol data unit preempts the second physical layer protocol data unit within the transmission opportunity. (interpreted as SU PPDU transmission UL low-latency (LL) from the STA to the AP, see fig 2b) Regarding claim 27, Chu teaches a first wireless communication device, comprising: a processing system that includes processor circuitry and memory circuitry that stores code, the processing system configured to cause the first wireless communication device to: transmit, to a second wireless communication device, a first physical layer protocol data unit within a transmission opportunity associated with the first wireless communication device, wherein the first physical layer protocol data unit includes an indication that preemption for low latency data is enabled; and receive an acknowledgment in response to the first physical layer protocol data unit, wherein the acknowledgment includes a preemption indication associated with low latency data based at least in part on the indication that preemption for low latency data is enabled. (interpreted as DL PDDU 1 + PR (preemption request) enabled, see fig. 2b. Also see For EDCA-based preemption, an AP grants low-latency (LL) devices an opportunity to contend within its DL TXOP , see para [0074]. Also see Preemption Request (PR) Enabled field with the following values: [0081] 00: Preemption Request is disallowed (or disabled) [0082] 01: Preemption Request is allowed (or enabled) a SIFS after the PPDU [0083] 10: Preemption Request is allowed (or enabled) a SIFS after the immediate response frame [0084] 11: reserved , see para [0080])) Regarding claim 2, Chu teaches t he first wireless communication device of claim 1, wherein, to receive the first physical layer protocol data unit, the processing system is configured to cause the first wireless communication device to: receive, via a broadcast resource unit, a trigger frame that indicates the allocation of the first resource unit for the preemption indication associated with low latency data, wherein the first physical layer protocol data unit comprises the broadcast resource unit and one or more dedicated resource units. (interpreted as TXOP preemption is enabled for an LL STA (e.g., enabling preemption request frame transmission) when the delay-bound counter of the low-latency data reaches a predefined value. The predefined value can be announced by an AP using a broadcast management frame (e.g., Beacon, Probe Response, etc.) , see para [0105]) Regarding claim 3, Chu teaches t he first wireless communication device of claim 2, wherein the processing system is further configured to cause the first wireless communication device to: decode signaling on the broadcast resource unit of the first physical layer protocol data unit based at least in part on a wireless station identifier of the broadcast resource unit. (interpreted as The LL STA that decodes the L-SIG field of the PPDU including the immediate response frame followed by the PPDU (with the PR Enabled field set to 1 and the RI field set to 1) may transmit the PR frame a SIFS after the PPDU including the immediate response frame , see para [0096]. Regarding claim 4 and 21 , Chu teaches t he first wireless communication device of claim 1, wherein the processing system is further configured to cause the first wireless communication device to: decode the first physical layer protocol data unit based at least in part on an association identifier associated with low latency data. (interpreted as in order to provide fair low-latency preemption, all the STAs in the basic service set (BSS) have the same view of low-latency access categories (ACs) and/or traffic identifies (TIDs) (ACs/TIDs) and non-low-latency ACs/TIDs. For example, the non-low-latency ACs/TIDs are defined as BSS policy, and an AP announces the non-low-latency ACs/TIDs in the BSS through Beacon or the other management frame. The low-latency ACs/TIDs are defined as BSS policy, and an AP announces the low-latency ACs/TIDs in the BSS through Beacon or the other management frame , see para [0070]) Regarding claim 5 and 22 , Chu teaches t he first wireless communication device of claim 1, wherein, to transmit the preemption indication, the processing system is configured to cause the first wireless communication device to: transmit a signaling frame comprising the preemption indication, (PRI) wherein transmitting the third physical layer protocol data unit (DL PPDU2) is based at least in part on transmitting the signaling frame. (interpreted as preemption traffic indication (PRI) which preempts the DL PPDU2 , see fig. 2b) Regarding claim 7, Chu teaches t he first wireless communication device of claim 1, wherein the processing system is further configured to cause the first wireless communication device to: generate the preemption indication based at least in part on information indicated by the first physical layer protocol data unit. (interpreted as DL PDDU 1 + PR (preemption request) enabled, see fig. 2b. Also see For EDCA-based preemption, an AP grants low-latency (LL) devices an opportunity to contend within its DL TXOP , see para [0074]. Also see Preemption Request (PR) Enabled field with the following values: [0081] 00: Preemption Request is disallowed (or disabled) [0082] 01: Preemption Request is allowed (or enabled) a SIFS after the PPDU [0083] 10: Preemption Request is allowed (or enabled) a SIFS after the immediate response frame [0084] 11: reserved , see para [0080])) Regarding claim 10, Chu teaches t he first wireless communication device of claim 1, wherein the first physical layer protocol data unit indicates a second allocation of a second resource unit for a second preemption indication associated with a second type of traffic, and the first physical layer protocol data unit comprises a traffic identifier, an access category, or a stream classification service identifier for the second type of traffic. (interpreted as In some embodiments, in order to provide fair low-latency preemption, all the STAs in the basic service set (BSS) have the same view of low-latency access categories (ACs) and/or traffic identifies (TIDs) (ACs/TIDs) and non-low-latency ACs/TIDs. For example, the non-low-latency ACs/TIDs are defined as BSS policy, and an AP announces the non-low-latency ACs/TIDs in the BSS through Beacon or the other management frame , see para [0070]) Regarding claim 11, Chu teaches t he first wireless communication device of claim 1, wherein the first resource unit is a random access resource unit. (interpreted as a new type of random-access RU for only LL traffic , see para [0075]) Regarding claim 12, Chu teaches t he first wireless communication device of claim 11, wherein the random access resource unit is associated with a traffic category. (interpreted as a new type of random-access RU for only LL traffic , see para [0075]) Regarding claim 13, Chu teaches t he first wireless communication device of claim 1, wherein, to transmit the preemption indication, the processing system is configured to cause the first wireless communication device to: transmit the preemption indication without performing a resource unit countdown, a listen before talk procedure, or a channel access countdown, or any combination thereof. (interpreted as i n an embodiment, the indication includes at least one of (a) the preemption request frame transmission is allowed a SIFS after the frame and (b), the preemption request frame transmission is allowed a SIFS after an immediate response frame for the frame , see para [0011]) Regarding claim 15, Chu teaches the second wireless communication device of claim 14, however does not teach wherein, to transmit the first physical layer protocol data unit, the processing system is configured to cause the second wireless communication device to: transmit, via the one or more dedicated resource units, one or more frames to a third wireless communication device, wherein the one or more frames indicates a second allocation of a second resource unit for an acknowledgment to the first physical layer protocol data unit. (interpreted as The first issue with preemption is when to transmit a Preemption Request frame. An immediate response frame (e.g., acknowledge (Ack) or BA frame) in response to a PPDU indicating “Preemption Request (PR) enabled” may or may not be transmitted depending on the Ack Policy of the MAC header in the MAC protocol Data Unit (MPDU) or Aggregated MPDU (A-MPDU) included in the PPDU. Indication of “PR enabled” can be included in the PHY header, so if a 3.sup.rd-party LL STA may not successfully decode the MAC header of the (A-)MPDU included in the PPDU while decoding the PHY header of the PPDU, the 3.sup.rd-party LL STA does not figure out whether the immediate response frame is transmitted right after the PPDU indicating the PR enabled , see para [0077]) Regarding claim 19, Chu teaches second wireless communication device of claim 15, wherein, to transmit the first physical layer protocol data unit, the processing system is configured to cause the second wireless communication device to: transmit, via the one or more dedicated resource units, a second one or more frames to a fourth wireless communication device, wherein the second one or more frames indicates a third allocation of a third resource unit for an acknowledgment to the first physical layer protocol data unit. (interpreted as The first issue with preemption is when to transmit a Preemption Request frame. An immediate response frame (e.g., acknowledge (Ack) or BA frame) in response to a PPDU indicating “Preemption Request (PR) enabled” may or may not be transmitted depending on the Ack Policy of the MAC header in the MAC protocol Data Unit (MPDU) or Aggregated MPDU (A-MPDU) included in the PPDU. Indication of “PR enabled” can be included in the PHY header, so if a 3.sup.rd-party LL STA may not successfully decode the MAC header of the (A-)MPDU included in the PPDU while decoding the PHY header of the PPDU, the 3.sup.rd-party LL STA does not figure out whether the immediate response frame is transmitted right after the PPDU indicating the PR enabled , see para [0077]. It would have been obvious to perform the steps for a 4 th STA.) Regarding claim 20, Chu teaches second wireless communication device of claim 14, wherein, to receive the preemption indication associated with low latency data, the processing system is configured to cause the second wireless communication device to: receive a plurality of preemption indications associated with low latency data, wherein each preemption indication of the plurality of preemption indications comprises a same content. (interpreted as in order to provide fair low-latency preemption, all the STAs in the basic service set (BSS) have the same view of low-latency access categories (ACs) and/or traffic identifies (TIDs) (ACs/TIDs) and non-low-latency ACs/TIDs. For example, the non-low-latency ACs/TIDs are defined as BSS policy, and an AP announces the non-low-latency ACs/TIDs in the BSS through Beacon or the other management frame. The low-latency ACs/TIDs are defined as BSS policy, and an AP announces the low-latency ACs/TIDs in the BSS through Beacon or the other management frame , see para [0070]) Regarding claim 28, Chu teaches the first wireless communication device of claim 27, wherein the processing system is further configured to cause the first wireless communication device to: transmit, to the second wireless communication device, a third physical layer protocol data unit within the transmission opportunity associated with the first wireless communication device, wherein the third physical layer protocol data unit includes a second indication that preemption for low latency data is enabled; and receive a second acknowledgment in response to the third physical layer protocol data unit, wherein the second acknowledgment includes an indication that the second wireless communication device does not have low latency data. (interpreted as DL PDDU 1 + PR (preemption request) enabled, see fig. 2b. Also see For EDCA-based preemption, an AP grants low-latency (LL) devices an opportunity to contend within its DL TXOP , see para [0074]. Also see Preemption Request (PR) Enabled field with the following values: [0081] 00: Preemption Request is disallowed (or disabled) [0082] 01: Preemption Request is allowed (or enabled) a SIFS after the PPDU [0083] 10: Preemption Request is allowed (or enabled) a SIFS after the immediate response frame [0084] 11: reserved , see para [0080]. Also see as in order to provide fair low-latency preemption, all the STAs in the basic service set (BSS) have the same view of low-latency access categories (ACs) and/or traffic identifies (TIDs) (ACs/TIDs) and non-low-latency ACs/TIDs. For example, the non-low-latency ACs/TIDs are defined as BSS policy, and an AP announces the non-low-latency ACs/TIDs in the BSS through Beacon or the other management frame. The low-latency ACs/TIDs are defined as BSS policy, and an AP announces the low-latency ACs/TIDs in the BSS through Beacon or the other management frame, see para [0070] ) Regarding claim 29, Chu teaches the first wireless communication device of claim 27, wherein the processing system is further configured to cause the first wireless communication device to: receive, in accordance with the preemption indication, a second physical layer protocol data unit from the second wireless communication device within the transmission opportunity associated with the first wireless communication device. (interpreted as response to the PRI the DL PPDU 2 fig. 2b . Also see transmission opportunity (TXOP) holder and wherein the controller is configured to transmit the low-latency frame during a TXOP of the TXOP holder para [0005]) ) Regarding claim 30, Chu teaches the first wireless communication device of claim 27, wherein the processing system is further configured to cause the first wireless communication device to: defer a remainder of the transmission opportunity associated with the first wireless communication device to the second wireless communication device in accordance with the preemption indication. (interpreted as Preemption in down-link (DL) TXOP in accordance with prior art is now described with reference to FIG. 2A. For preemption in DL TXOP, a large PPDU (“DL PPDU” in FIG. 2A) is divided into small PPDUs with maximum length limitation and time gaps to enable preemption opportunity for low-latency (LL) transmitter. For this case, one or more LL transmitters can send common preemption request (PR) (similar to clear-to-send (CTS) frame) during the time gaps when the preemption is allowed. The time gap allowed for preemption is indicated in the PPDU preceding the time gap , see para [0073]) Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103 The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action: A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made. Claim(s) 6, 23 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chu (Pub No 20250056595) further in view of Sundaravardhan (Pub No 20230239743) Regarding claim 6 and 23 , Chu teaches t he first wireless communication device of claim 1, wherein, to transmit the preemption indication, the processing system is configured to cause the first wireless communication device to: transmit a trigger-based physical layer protocol data unit (interpreted as an AP may transmit a Trigger frame (TF) to trigger UL trigger-based (TB) PPDU transmissions from one or more non-AP STAs in a TXOP, as illustrated in FIG. 13. If the Trigger frame is transmitted in a UHR PPDU, the PR Enabled field can be set to “0” in the PHY header of the UHR PPDU , see para [0102]) However Chu does not teach comprising null aggregate Medium Access Control (MAC) protocol data unit delimiters, wherein transmitting the third physical layer protocol data unit is based at least in part on the trigger-based physical layer protocol data unit. Sundaravardhan teaches comprising null aggregate Medium Access Control (MAC) protocol data unit delimiters, wherein transmitting the third physical layer protocol data unit is based at least in part on the trigger-based physical layer protocol data unit. (interpreted as In some embodiments, in lieu of padding the BSRP or another frame that initiates a channel-switch (e.g., by channel switching module 218), an AP may use a “filler PPDU” SIFS after the BSRP, that consists of a QoS-null MPDU and padding MPDU delimiters. The filler PPDU allows for checking FCS before switching channels , see para [0104]) It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the system taught by Chu with the null MPDU as taught by Sundaravaradhan with the motivation being to monitor the switching channels with padding and null data. Claim(s) 8-9, 24-25 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chu (Pub No 20250056595) further in view of Yu (Pub No 20250081034) Regarding claim 8 and 24 , Chu teaches the first wireless communication device of claim 1, however does not teach wherein the first physical layer protocol data unit sets a first network allocation vector (NAV) for a first set of wireless communication devices comprising at least the first wireless communication device, and the third physical layer protocol data unit sets a second NAV for a second set of wireless communication devices that are not associated with low latency data. Yu teaches wherein the first physical layer protocol data unit sets a first network allocation vector (NAV) for a first set of wireless communication devices comprising at least the first wireless communication device, and the third physical layer protocol data unit sets a second NAV for a second set of wireless communication devices that are not associated with low latency data. (interpreted as When the station STA3 receives the RTS frame, it may set a NAV timer of the station STA3 for a transmission duration of subsequently transmitted frames (for example, a duration of SIFS+CTS frame duration+SIFS+data frame duration+SIFS+ACK frame duration) using duration information included in the RTS frame. When the station STA3 receives the CTS frame, it may set the NAV timer of the station STA3 for a transmission duration of subsequently transmitted frames using duration information included in the CTS frame. Upon receiving a new frame before the NAV timer expires, the station STA3 may update the NAV timer of the station STA3 by using duration information included in the new frame. The station STA3 does not attempt to access the channel until the NAV timer expires , see para [0082]) It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the system taught by Chu with the NAVs taught by Lu with the motivation being to determine channel occupancy. Regarding claim 9 , Chu teaches the first wireless communication device of claim 1, however does not teach wherein the first physical layer protocol data unit sets a first network allocation vector (NAV), and the processing system is further configured to cause the first wireless communication device to: set a second NAV based at least in part on transmission of the third physical layer protocol data unit. Yu teaches wherein the first physical layer protocol data unit sets a first network allocation vector (NAV), and the processing system is further configured to cause the first wireless communication device to: set a second NAV based at least in part on transmission of the third physical layer protocol data unit. (interpreted as When the station STA3 receives the RTS frame, it may set a NAV timer of the station STA3 for a transmission duration of subsequently transmitted frames (for example, a duration of SIFS+CTS frame duration+SIFS+data frame duration+SIFS+ACK frame duration) using duration information included in the RTS frame. When the station STA3 receives the CTS frame, it may set the NAV timer of the station STA3 for a transmission duration of subsequently transmitted frames using duration information included in the CTS frame. Upon receiving a new frame before the NAV timer expires, the station STA3 may update the NAV timer of the station STA3 by using duration information included in the new frame. The station STA3 does not attempt to access the channel until the NAV timer expires , see para [0082]) It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the system taught by Chu with the NAVs taught by Yu with the motivation being to determine channel occupancy. Regarding claim 25, Chu teaches the second wireless communication device of claim 14, however does not teach wherein, to transmit the first physical layer protocol data unit, the processing system is configured to cause the second wireless communication device to: set a first network allocation vector (NAV) until after the first resource unit, wherein the third physical layer protocol data unit sets a second NAV. Lu teaches wherein, to transmit the first physical layer protocol data unit, the processing system is configured to cause the second wireless communication device to: set a first network allocation vector (NAV) until after the first resource unit, wherein the third physical layer protocol data unit sets a second NAV. (interpreted as When the station STA3 receives the RTS frame, it may set a NAV timer of the station STA3 for a transmission duration of subsequently transmitted frames (for example, a duration of SIFS+CTS frame duration+SIFS+data frame duration+SIFS+ACK frame duration) using duration information included in the RTS frame. When the station STA3 receives the CTS frame, it may set the NAV timer of the station STA3 for a transmission duration of subsequently transmitted frames using duration information included in the CTS frame. Upon receiving a new frame before the NAV timer expires, the station STA3 may update the NAV timer of the station STA3 by using duration information included in the new frame. The station STA3 does not attempt to access the channel until the NAV timer expires , see para [0082]) It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the system taught by Chu with the Navs taught by Yu with the motivation being to determine channel occupancy. Claim(s) 16-17 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chu (Pub No 20250056595) further in view of Shafin (Pub No 20250126562) Regarding claim 16 , Chu teaches the second wireless communication device of claim 15, however does not teach wherein the processing system is further configured to cause the second wireless communication device to: receive the acknowledgment to the first physical layer protocol data unit via the second resource unit. Shafin teaches wherein the processing system is further configured to cause the second wireless communication device to: receive the acknowledgment to the first physical layer protocol data unit via the second resource unit. (interpreted as by simultaneous transmission, it can mean that the non-AP MLD cannot transmit a frame, e.g., physical layer protocol data unit (PPDU), MAC protocol data unit (MPDU), Aggregated-MPDU (A-MPDU), physical layer service data unit (PSDU), to the AP MLD over more than one link where the frame transmitted over those multiple links overlaps in time, or their corresponding acknowledgement frame (ack or block ack) overlaps in time, or the frame in one link overlaps in time with an acknowledgement frame (ack/block-ack) over another link , see para [0079]) It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the system taught by Chu with the acknowledgement as taught by Safin with the motivation being to send confirmations for packets received. Regarding claim 17 , Chu teaches the second wireless communication device of claim 15, however does not teach wherein: the first resource unit and the second resource unit overlap in time. Shafin teaches wherein: the first resource unit and the second resource unit overlap in time. (interpreted as by simultaneous transmission, it can mean that the non-AP MLD cannot transmit a frame, e.g., physical layer protocol data unit (PPDU), MAC protocol data unit (MPDU), Aggregated-MPDU (A-MPDU), physical layer service data unit (PSDU), to the AP MLD over more than one link where the frame transmitted over those multiple links overlaps in time, or their corresponding acknowledgement frame (ack or block ack) overlaps in time, or the frame in one link overlaps in time with an acknowledgement frame (ack/block-ack) over another link , see para [0079]) It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the system taught by Chu with the acknowledgement as taught by Safin with the motivation being to send confirmations for packets received. Claim(s) 18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chu (Pub No 20250056595) further in view of Ko (Pub No 20240008083) Regarding claim 18, Chu teaches the second wireless communication device of claim 15, however does not teach wherein a triggered response scheduling control field control field in a medium access control header of a frame of the one or more frames indicates the second allocation of the second resource unit. Ko teaches wherein a triggered response scheduling control field control field in a medium access control header of a frame of the one or more frames indicates the second allocation of the second resource unit. (interpreted as In addition, a triggering frame may be a frame including trigger information in a MAC header. The trigger information may be triggered response scheduling (TRS) included in an HT control field, a control subfield, or an A-control subfield of a MAC header. In addition, trigger information may be information causing transmission of a TB PPDU , see para [0209] It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the system taught by Chu with the allocation as taught by Ko with the motivation being to send allocation information for determining resources. Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to FILLIN "Examiner name" \* MERGEFORMAT BAO G NGUYEN whose telephone number is FILLIN "Phone number" \* MERGEFORMAT (571)272-7732 . The examiner can normally be reached FILLIN "Work Schedule?" \* MERGEFORMAT M-F 10pm - 6:30pm . 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, FILLIN "SPE Name?" \* MERGEFORMAT Huy Vu can be reached at FILLIN "SPE Phone?" \* MERGEFORMAT 571-272-3155 . 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. /BAO G NGUYEN/ Examiner, Art Unit 2461 /HUY D VU/ Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2461