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 .
DETAILED ACTION
Response to Amendment
Applicant's amendment filed on 3/11/2026 have been entered and fully considered. Claims 1, 3, 14-17 and 27-29 are amended, and claims 1-29 are currently pending.
Specification objection have been withdrawn based on amendment.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments with respect to claim rejections under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) regarding claims 1-3, 10, 14-17, 22 and 25-29 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Examiner respectfully disagrees. In response to applicant's argument that the references fail to show certain features of the invention, it is noted that the features upon which applicant relies (i.e., single mobility domain (SMD) entity generally refers to a logical entity that comprises more than one non-collocated AP device such as a non-AP device that is associated with the SMD entity can seamless roam between the AP devices affiliated with the SMD entity) are not recited in the rejected claim(s). Although the claims are interpreted in light of the specification, limitations from the specification are not read into the claims. See In re Van Geuns, 988 F.2d 1181, 26 USPQ2d 1057 (Fed. Cir. 1993). Therefore, the device (AP MLD) disclosed by Patil performs the steps disclosed in the claims (please refer to the detailed reference mapping in the claim rejection below) may be interpreted as the single mobility domain (SMD) disclosed in independent claims 1, 16 and 29 (and their respective dependent claims). In addition, Patil teaches as one non-limiting example, a pair of AP entities having the same operating class may communicate on the same wireless channel. However, the pair of APs may be physically separate (non-collocated) and may thus have different MAC addresses (BSSIDs) (Paragraph 0125). Therefore, Patil teaches each and every element as set forth in the claims.
Applicant’s argument with respect to claim rejections under 35 U.S.C. 103 regarding claims 4-9, 11-13, 18-21, 23 and 24, that Examiner has not properly characterized the teachings of the references and, as a result, has failed to ascertain differences between the claimed invention and the references. According a prima facie case of obviousness has not been established. Thus, claims 4-9, 11-13, 18-21, 23 and 24 each depend from one of independent claims 1 and 16, which Applicant submits are allowable over Patil for at least the reasons discussed above. Further, D1 fails to overcome the deficiencies of Patil with respect to the independent claims 1 and 16. Therefore, claims 4-9, 11-13, 18-21, 23 and 24 are believed to be allowable at least due to their dependence from an allowable base claim and for their additional distinguishing features recited therein.
Examiner respectfully disagrees. Patil teaches the limitations of independent claims 1, 16 and 29, as discussed above, and D1 is cited for additional elements of dependent claims 4-9, 11-13, 18-21, 23 and 24, therefore teachings of each references have been differentiated and prima facie case of obviousness has been established. Therefore, the combination of Patil and D1 teaches various limitations of dependent claims 4-9, 11-13, 18-21, 23 and 24.
Claim Objections
Claim 16 is objected to because of the following informalities:
Claim 16 recites “via the at least one transceiver” on line 8. Examiner suggest either amending the limitation to “via [[the]] an at least one transceiver”, or amending the limitation similar to claim 1, by adding “at least one transceiver” after line 2. Other alternative amendment may also be considered. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim 1-3, 10, 14-17, 22 and 25-29 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Patil et al. (US 20210014911 A1 and Patil hereinafter).
Regarding claim 1, Patil teaches an apparatus for wireless communication (Paragraphs 0070 and 0108; STA [wireless station]. Figure 5 and Paragraph 0099; wireless communication device 500), comprising:
at least one memory comprising computer-executable instructions (Figure 5 and Paragraph 0099; one or more memory blocks or elements. Paragraph 0104; memory can store non-transitory processor- or computer-executable software code containing instructions);
at least one transceiver (Paragraph 0102; radio 504 generally includes at least one radio frequency (RF) transmitter (or “transmitter chain”) and at least one RF receiver (or “receiver chain”), which may be combined into one or more transceivers); and
one or more processors configured to execute the computer-executable instructions (Figure 5 and Paragraph 0099; one or more processors, processing blocks or processing elements. Paragraph 0104; instructions stored in memory when executed by the processor) to cause the apparatus to (Paragraph 0104; cause the processor to perform various operations for wireless communication):
establish association with a single mobility domain (SMD) entity (Figure 9B and Paragraph 0133; first device D1 may be an AP MLD [interpreted as SMD entity] and second device may be a STA. Paragraph 0134; at time t1, the first device D1 [SMD] transmits a first packet 921 on a first communication link to the second device D2 [STA]. Paragraphs 0139 and 0140; the second device D2 [STA] transmits an ML Association request 931 on the first communication link based at least in part on the ML information included int eh first packet 921. The first device D1 [SMD entity] receives the ML Association request 931 from the second device D2 and transmits a second packet 922 to the first device D1);
communicate, via the at least one transceiver, with a first set of one or more serving access point (AP) devices affiliated with the SMD entity (Figure 9B and Paragraph 0133; the AP MLD may include a first AP associated with a first communication link, and may include one or more secondary APs associated with respective one or more secondary communication links. Thus the first AP and one or more secondary AP may be interpreted as a first set of one or more serving AP devices affiliated with the SMD entity. Paragraph 0134; the first device D1 transmits the first packet 921 to the second device D2. Paragraph 0142; the first device D1 and the second device D2 may establish a common BA session with one another for one or more TIDs. Thus, the first device D1 and the second device D2 may map MSDUs for the one or more TIDs with one or more of the first and the second communication links. By establishing the common BA session and mapping the one or more TIDs, the first device D1 and the second device D2 may implement aspects of the present disclosure to map (or remap, affiliate, or reaffiliate) the one or more TIDs to multiple links without tearing-down the common BA session or establishing a new BA session. The first device D1 and the second device D2 may then communicate on one or more of the first communication link and the secondary communication links according to their respectively mapped TIDs);
receive, via the at least one transceiver at least a first frame indicating one or more AP devices affiliated with the SMD entity (Figure 9B and Paragraph 0134; the first device D1 transmits the first packet 921 to the second device D2. The first packet 921 may include ML information for the first communication link and the one or more secondary communication links. In some implementations, the first packet 921 may uniquely identify each link of the first communication link and the one or more secondary communication links based on a limited set of information (tuple) such as, for example, {operating class, channel, and BSSID}, where operating class indicates an operating class for the link, channel indicates a channel for the link, and BSSID indicates a BSSID for the link. Paragraph 0140; the first device D1 transmit a second packet 922 [interpreted as the first frame] to the first device D1. The second packet 922 may carry additional discovery information for the first communication link and the one or more secondary communication links);
select a second set of one or more target AP devices after receiving the at least a first frame (Figure 9B and Paragraph 0144; the first device D1 may remap one or more TIDs from one communication link to another communication link. The first device D1 may indicate the remapping to the second device D2 in the third packet 923. For example, the first device D1 may remap a first TID (such as TID=4) from the first communication link to the second communication link and indicate the remapping in the third packet 923. Upon receiving the third packet 923, the second device D2 may switch from sending packets with TID=4 on the first communication link to sending packets with TID=4 on the second communication link); and
transition from the first set to the second set (Figure 9B and Paragraph 0144; Upon receiving the third packet 923, the second device D2 may switch from sending packets with TID=4 on the first communication link to sending packets with TID=4 on the second communication link).
Regarding claim 16, Patil teaches an apparatus for wireless communication (Figure 5 and Paragraph 0099; wireless communication device 500), comprising:
at least one memory comprising computer-executable instructions (Figure 5 and Paragraph 0099; one or more memory blocks or elements. Paragraph 0104; memory can store non-transitory processor- or computer-executable software code containing instructions); and
one or more processors configured to execute the computer-executable instructions (Figure 5 and Paragraph 0099; one or more processors, processing blocks or processing elements. Paragraph 0104; instructions stored in memory when executed by the processor) to cause the apparatus to (Paragraph 0104; cause the processor to perform various operations for wireless communication):
generate at least a first frame indicating one or more serving AP devices affiliated with a single mobility domain (SMD) entity, wherein the apparatus is also affiliated with the SMD entity (Paragraphs 0123 0126; first device D1 may be an MLO entity [interpreted as SMD entity]. Figure 9B and Paragraph 0134; the first device D1 transmits the first packet 921 to the second device D2. The first packet 921 may include ML information for the first communication link and the one or more secondary communication links. In some implementations, the first packet 921 may uniquely identify each link of the first communication link and the one or more secondary communication links based on a limited set of information (tuple) such as, for example, {operating class, channel, and BSSID}, where operating class indicates an operating class for the link, channel indicates a channel for the link, and BSSID indicates a BSSID for the link. Paragraph 0140; the first device D1 transmit a second packet 922 [interpreted as the first frame] to the first device D1. The second packet 922 may carry additional discovery information for the first communication link and the one or more secondary communication links);
transmit, via the at least one transceiver, the at least the first frame to a wireless node affiliated with the SMD entity (Paragraphs 0123 0126; first device D1 may be an MLO entity [interpreted as SMD entity]. Figure 9B and Paragraph 0134; the first device D1 transmits the first packet 921 to the second device D2); and
participate, after transmitting the first frame, in a procedure to transition the wireless node from a first set of one or more serving AP devices to a second set of one or more serving AP devices (Figure 9B and Paragraph 0144; the first device D1 may remap one or more TIDs from one communication link to another communication link. The first device D1 may indicate the remapping to the second device D2 in the third packet 923. For example, the first device D1 may remap a first TID (such as TID=4) from the first communication link to the second communication link and indicate the remapping in the third packet 923. Upon receiving the third packet 923, the second device D2 may switch from sending packets with TID=4 on the first communication link to sending packets with TID=4 on the second communication link).
Regarding claim 2, Patil teaches all of the limitations of claim 1, as described above. Further, Patil teaches wherein the transition is performed in a manner that is independent of reassociation with the SMD entity (Figure 9B and Paragraph 0144; the second device D2 may switch from communicating over the first communication link for TID=4 to communicating over the second communication link for TID=4 without disassociating from or reassociating with the first device D1, thereby saving time and resources).
Regarding claims 3 and 17, Patil teaches all of the limitations of claims 1 and 16, as described above. Further, Patil teaches wherein the one or more processors are further configured to cause the apparatus to: transmit, via the at least one transceiver, a request for the first frame (Figure 9B and Paragraph 0139; the second device D2 transmits an ML Association request 931 on the first communication link based at least in part on the ML information included in the first packet 921), wherein the first frame is received after transmitting the request (Figure 9B and Paragraph 0140; the first device D1 transmit a second packet 922 [interpreted as the first frame] to the first device D1. The second packet 922 may carry additional discovery information for the first communication link and the one or more secondary communication links).
Regarding claims 10 and 22, Patil teaches all of the limitations of claims 1 and 16, as described above. Further, Patil teaches wherein the first frame includes one or more fields that indicate at least one of: a media access control (MAC) address associated with the SMD entity; at least one MAC address associated with at least one target AP multi-link device (MLD); that the at least one target AP MLD belongs to the SMD entity; an identifier (ID) of the at least one target AP MLD; or one or more station (STA) profiles corresponding to the one or more AP devices indicated by the frame (Paragraph 0125; the ML information may include one or more of a first BSSID for the first communication link, a second BSSID for the second communication link. The pair of APs may be physically separate (non-collocated) and may thus have different MAC addresses (BSSIDs). Paragraph 0177; each of the per-link profile supplements may include at least a capability information or operating parameter information of a corresponding secondary AP of the one or more secondary APs. The first portion may include a reduced neighbor report, including a unique link identifier (ID) that identifies a corresponding communication link of the first communication link or the one or more secondary communication links associated with a respective AP of the first AP or the one or more secondary APs).
Regarding claim 14, Patil teaches all of the limitations of claim 1, as described above. Further, Patil teaches wherein the one or more processors are further configured to cause the apparatus to: transmit, via the at least one transceiver, a request for information regarding one or more of the one or more AP devices indicated in the first frame (Figure 9B and Paragraphs 0139 and 0140; second device D2 transmits an ML Association request); receive, via the at least one transceiver, the information after transmitting the request (Figure 9B and Paragraphs 0139 and 0140; first device D1 receives the ML Association request 931 from the second device D2 on the first communication link, and transmits a second packet 922 to the first device D1 on the first communication link at time t.sub.4. In some implementations, the second packet 922 may carry additional discovery information for the first communication link and the one or more secondary communication links); and use the information when selecting the second set of one or more target AP devices (Figure 9B and Paragraph 0141; second device D2 receives the second packet 922, and may use the discovery information to perform an association operation with the second device D2 between times t.sub.5 and t.sub.6. In some implementations, the first device D1 and the second device D2 may associate by establishing a common security context between a first MAC-SAP endpoint of the first device D1 and a second MAC-SAP endpoint of the second device D).
Regarding claim 15, Patil teaches all of the limitations of claim 1, as described above. Further, Patil teaches further comprising wherein the apparatus is configured to operate as a wireless station (Figure 9B and Paragraph 0133; first device D1 may be an AP MLD [interpreted as SMD entity] and second device may be a STA).
Regarding claim 25, Patil teaches all of the limitations of claim 16, as described above. Further, Patil teaches herein the one or more serving AP devices indicated in the first frame comprise at least one single AP MLD is affiliated with a set of collocated APs (Figure 11 and Paragraph 0125; the ML information may include one or more of: a first operating class for the first communication link; a first wireless channel for the first communication link; a first BSSID for the first communication link; a second operating class for the second communication link; a second wireless channel for the second communication link; or a second BSSID for the second communication link).
Regarding claim 26, Patil teaches all of the limitations of claim 16, as described above. Further, Patil teaches wherein the one or more serving AP devices indicated in the first frame comprise at least two AP MLDs affiliated with a set of non-collocated APs (Figure 11 and Paragraph 0125; the ML information may include one or more of: a first operating class for the first communication link; a first wireless channel for the first communication link; a first BSSID for the first communication link; a second operating class for the second communication link; a second wireless channel for the second communication link; or a second BSSID for the second communication link. In some aspects, at least one of the operating classes, the wireless channels, or the BSSIDs may be different. As one non-limiting example, a pair of AP entities having the same operating class may communicate on the same wireless channel. However, the pair of APs may be physically separate (non-collocated) and may thus have different MAC addresses (BSSIDs)).
Regarding claim 27, Patil teaches all of the limitations of claim 16, as described above. Further, Patil teaches wherein the one or more processors are further configured to cause the apparatus to: receive, via the at least one transceiver, a request for information regarding one or more of the one or more AP devices indicated in the first frame (Figure 9B and Paragraphs 0139 and 0140; second device D2 transmits an ML Association request); and transmit, via the at least one transceiver, the information after receiving the request (Figure 9B and Paragraphs 0139 and 0140; first device D1 receives the ML Association request 931 from the second device D2 on the first communication link, and transmits a second packet 922 to the first device D1 on the first communication link at time t.sub.4. In some implementations, the second packet 922 may carry additional discovery information for the first communication link and the one or more secondary communication links).
Regarding claim 28, Patil teaches all of the limitations of claim 16, as described above. Further, Patil teaches wherein the apparatus is configured to operate as an access point (AP) (Paragraphs 0123 0126; first device D1 may be an MLO entity [interpreted as SMD entity]).
Regarding claim 29, claim 29 recites similar features as claim 1, therefore is rejected for at least the same reason as discussed above regarding claim 1.
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 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 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.
The factual inquiries set forth in Graham v. John Deere Co., 383 U.S. 1, 148 USPQ 459 (1966), that are applied for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claims 4-9, 11-13, 18-21, 23 and 24 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Patil, as applied in the claims above, further in view of Draft Standard for Information Technology-Tele-Communications and Information Exchange between Systems Local and Metropolitan Area Networks-Specific Requirements Part 11: Wireless LAN Medium Access Control (MAC) and Physical Layer (PHY) Specifications Amendment 8: Enhancements for Extremely High Throughput (EHT)”, 802.11 Working Group of the LAN/MAN Standards Committee of the IEEE Computer Society, IEEE-SA, Vo.. 802.11be drafts, No. D4.1, 22 September 2033, Pages 1-1045, XP068202981, hereinafter D1.
Regarding claim 4, Patil teaches all of the limitations of claim 1, as described above. Further, Patil teaches wherein in order to select, the one or more processors are further configured to cause the apparatus to at least one of (Figure 9B and Paragraphs 0142-0144; the first device D1 and the second device D2 may map MSDUs for the one or more TIDs with one or more of the first and the second communication links. By establishing the common BA session and mapping the one or more TIDs, the first device D1 and the second device D2 may implement aspects of the present disclosure to map (or remap, affiliate, or reaffiliate) the one or more TIDs to multiple links without tearing-down the common BA session or establishing a new BA session. One or more link conditions (such as an amount of latency) may change, causing the first device D1 to remap one or more of the TIDs to one or more different links. The first device D1 may remap one or more TIDs from one communication link to another communication link. The first device D1 may indicate the remapping to the second device D2 in the third packet 923).
Patil does not explicitly teach delete one or more AP devices from a list of target AP devices; or add one or more AP devices to the list of target AP devices. In an analogous art, D1 teaches delete one or more AP devices from a list of target AP devices; or add one or more AP devices to the list of target AP devices (Page 327 Section 9.6.35.12; Link Reconfiguration Notify frame is used by an AP MLD to recommend addition and/or deletion of link(s) to the ML setup of its associated non-AP MLD(s)). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to combine the teachings of Patil and D1 because AP may establish BSSs on any of the different communication links, and therefore it is desirable to improve communication between the AP and the one or more STAs over each of the communication links (Patil, Paragraph 0004).
Regarding claim 5, the combination of Patil and D1 teaches all of the limitations of claim 4, as described above. Further, Patil teaches wherein the added one or more AP devices comprise a subset of the one or more AP devices indicated by the frame (Figure 9B and Paragraphs 0142-0144; the first device D1 and the second device D2 may map MSDUs for the one or more TIDs with one or more of the first and the second communication links. By establishing the common BA session and mapping the one or more TIDs, the first device D1 and the second device D2 may implement aspects of the present disclosure to map (or remap, affiliate, or reaffiliate) the one or more TIDs to multiple links without tearing-down the common BA session or establishing a new BA session. One or more link conditions (such as an amount of latency) may change, causing the first device D1 to remap one or more of the TIDs to one or more different links. The first device D1 may remap one or more TIDs from one communication link to another communication link. The first device D1 may indicate the remapping to the second device D2 in the third packet 923).
Regarding claims 6 and 18, Patil teaches all of the limitations of claims 1 and 16, as described above.
Patil does not explicitly teach wherein the first frame comprises a link reconfiguration notify frame. In an analogous art, D1 teaches wherein the first frame comprises a link reconfiguration notify frame (Page 327 Section 9.6.35.12; Link Reconfiguration Notify frame is used by an AP MLD to recommend addition and/or deletion of link(s) to the ML setup of its associated non-AP MLD(s)). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to combine the teachings of Patil and D1 because AP may establish BSSs on any of the different communication links, and therefore it is desirable to improve communication between the AP and the one or more STAs over each of the communication links (Patil, Paragraph 0004).
Regarding claims 7 and 19, the combination of Patil and D1 teaches all of the limitations of claims 6 and 18, as described above. Further, D1 teaches wherein the link reconfiguration notify frame (Page 327 Section 9.6.35.12; Link Reconfiguration Notify frame is used by an AP MLD to recommend addition and/or deletion of link(s) to the ML setup of its associated non-AP MLD(s)) conveys at least one multi-link (ML) information element (IE) (Page 499 Section 35.3.3.1; Multi-Link element). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to combine the teachings of Patil and D1 because AP may establish BSSs on any of the different communication links, and therefore it is desirable to improve communication between the AP and the one or more STAs over each of the communication links (Patil, Paragraph 0004).
Regarding claims 8 and 20, Patil teaches all of the limitations of claims 1 and 16, as described above.
Patil does not explicitly teach wherein the first frame comprises a basic service set (BSS) Transition Management (BTM) request frame. In an analogous art, D1 teaches wherein the first frame comprises a basic service set (BSS) Transition Management (BTM) request frame (Page 313 Section 9.6.13.8 and 9.6.13.9; BSS [basic service set] Transition Management Query/Request frame is transmitted to request or provide information on BSS transition candidate APs or AP MLDs). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to combine the teachings of Patil and D1 because AP may establish BSSs on any of the different communication links, and therefore it is desirable to improve communication between the AP and the one or more STAs over each of the communication links (Patil, Paragraph 0004).
Regarding claims 9 and 21, the combination of Patil and D1 teaches all of the limitations of claims 8 and 20, as described above. Further, D1 teaches wherein the BTM request frame conveys at least one Neighbor Report information element (IE) (Page 313 Section 9.6.13.8; BSS [basic service set] Transition Management Query/Request frame is transmitted to request or provide information on BSS transition candidate APs or AP MLDs. BSS Transition Candidate List Entries field contains zero or more Neighbor Report elements, as described in 9.4.2.35 (Neighbor Report element)). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to combine the teachings of Patil and D1 because AP may establish BSSs on any of the different communication links, and therefore it is desirable to improve communication between the AP and the one or more STAs over each of the communication links (Patil, Paragraph 0004).
Regarding claims 11 and 23, Patil teaches all of the limitations of claims 1 and 16, as described above.
Patil does not explicitly teach wherein the first frame conveys a STA profile for at least one of the indicated AP devices. In an analogous art, D1 teaches wherein the first frame conveys a STA profile for at least one of the indicated AP devices (Page 529 Section 35.3.6.5; AP MLD may recommend link(s) to be added or deleted in the ML setup of an associated non-AP MLD by sending an individually addressed Link Reconfiguration Notify frame to that non-AP MLD. The Link Reconfiguration Notify frame shall contain a Reconfiguration Multi-Link element that includes one Per-STA profile subelement for each affiliated AP). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to combine the teachings of Patil and D1 because AP may establish BSSs on any of the different communication links, and therefore it is desirable to improve communication between the AP and the one or more STAs over each of the communication links (Patil, Paragraph 0004).
Regarding claim 12, the combination of Patil and D1 teaches all of the limitations of claim 11, as described above. Further, Patil teaches wherein the first frame comprises: at least one of a first one or more fields or a first one or more elements that convey information common to a plurality of the indicated AP devices (Figure 11 and Paragraphs 0161 and 0162; common parameters); and at least one of a second one or more fields or a second one or more elements that convey information specific to one of the indicated AP devices (Figure 11 and Paragraphs 0163 and 0167; optional subelements, including data field 1113 BSSID 1127. Paragraph 0169; control field 1124 may include a plurality of subelements may include a Link ID subleement 1141, an independent MLA Bitmap subelement 1143, Anchor subelements 1144).
Regarding claim 13, the combination of Patil and D1 teaches all of the limitations of claim 12, as described above. Further, D1 teaches wherein the first one or more fields and one or more elements are carried in a first STA profile; and the second one or more fields and one or more elements are carried in a second STA profile (Page 529 Section 35.3.6.5; each Per-STA profile subelement contained in the Reconfiguration Multi-Link element included in the Link Reconfiguration Notify Frame include the complete profile subfields, the STA MAC address, etc.). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to combine the teachings of Patil and D1 because AP may establish BSSs on any of the different communication links, and therefore it is desirable to improve communication between the AP and the one or more STAs over each of the communication links (Patil, Paragraph 0004).
Regarding claim 24, the combination of Patil and D1 teaches all of the limitations of claim 23, as described above. Further, D1 teaches wherein: the first frame comprises: at least one of a first one or more fields or a first one or more elements that convey information common to a plurality of the indicated AP devices (Figure 11 and Paragraphs 0161 and 0162; common parameters); and at least one of a second one or more fields or a second one or more elements that convey information specific to one of the indicated AP devices (Figure 11 and Paragraphs 0163 and 0167; optional subelements, including data field 1113 BSSID 1127. Paragraph 0169; control field 1124 may include a plurality of subelements may include a Link ID subleement 1141, an independent MLA Bitmap subelement 1143, Anchor subelements 1144); the first one or more fields and one or more elements are carried in a first STA profile; the second one or more fields and one or more elements are carried in a second STA profile (Page 529 Section 35.3.6.5; each Per-STA profile subelement contained in the Reconfiguration Multi-Link element included in the Link Reconfiguration Notify Frame include the complete profile subfields, the STA MAC address, etc.); and the first STA profile occurs, in the first frame, before the second STA profile (Page 529 Section 35.3.6.5; Per-STA profile subelements may be arranged in any suitable order). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to combine the teachings of Patil and D1 because AP may establish BSSs on any of the different communication links, and therefore it is desirable to improve communication between the AP and the one or more STAs over each of the communication links (Patil, Paragraph 0004).
Pertinent Prior Art
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Chu et al. (US 20240138007 A1) discloses distributed AP MLD includes a plurality of AP MLDs in different devices at different locations having one medium access control (MAC) service access point (SAP), associating, by the non-AP device, with a first AP MLD of the plurality of AP MLDs in different devices; and roaming, by the non-AP device, to a second AP MLD of the plurality of AP MLDs in different devices without a reassociation.
Tadahal et al. (US 20230239762 A1) discloses method for seamless WiFi roaming of a multi-radio station when transitioning from an initial access point to a target access point
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. 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 Jing Gao whose telephone number is (571)270-7226. The examiner can normally be reached on 9am - 6pm M-F.
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 Alison Slater can be reached on (571) 270-0375. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/JING GAO/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2647
