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 .
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments, see pages 10-11, filed 03/10/2026, with respect to claims 11, 14, and 18-21 have been fully considered and are persuasive. The 35 U.S.C. 112(b) rejection of claims 11, 14, and 18-21 has been withdrawn.
Applicant’s arguments with respect to independent claims 1 and 46 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
Specification
The specification amendment submitted on 03/10/2026 which amended the title has been accepted.
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, 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 1-8, 18-19, and 46 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Huang et al. (WO 2022/032425 A1, hereinafter “Huang”) in view of Pushkarna et al. (US 2024/0406990 A1, hereinafter “Pushkarna”).
Regarding claims 1 and 46, Huang discloses an access point [see Fig. 2, 6, 7, 15, 20, para. 208; base station 105], comprising:
at least one processor [see Fig. 15, para. 213-214; processor 1540]; and
at least one memory storing instructions, the instructions when executed by the at least one processor causing the access point at least to [see Fig. 15, para. 213-214; memory 1530 storing instructions, the instructions when executed by the processor 1540 causing the base station at least to]
determine, based on determining that a direct link between stations based sensing procedure is triggered, wherein the direct link is established between non-Access Point Stations (STAs), a first station and a second station associated with the sensing procedure [see Fig. 6, 7, 20, para. 61, 91, 134, 140, 233-236, claims 28-29; determine, based on determining that a passive sidelink sensing procedure is triggered, wherein the sidelink is established between non-Access Point Stations (STAs), a transmitting device and a receiving device associated with the passive sidelink sensing procedure. Note that the passive sidelink sensing procedure is triggered by the base station when it sends configuration messages to the participating devices (transmitting device and receiving device)]; and
transmit, to at least one of the first station and the second station, a sensing performing request for performing the sensing procedure [see Fig. 6, 7, 20, para. 61, 91, 135, 141, 234-236, claims 28-29; transmit, to at least one of the transmitting device and the receiving device (UE 115), a control message indicating sensing resource for performing the passive sidelink sensing procedure. Note that the control messages assign resources and roles, thereby serving as a request or instruction to perform the sensing procedure].
Huang does not explicitly disclose a Tunneled Direct Link Setup (TDLS) link.
However, Pushkarna teaches a direct link is a Tunneled Direct Link Setup (TDLS) link established between non-Access Point Stations (STAs) [see Fig. 26-28, para. 103-112; a TDLS link established between non-AP STAs].
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide “a direct link is a Tunneled Direct Link Setup (TDLS) link established between non-Access Point Stations (STAs)”, as taught by Pushkarna, into the system of Huang so that it would support opportunistic WLAN Sensing [see Pushkarna, para. 106].
Regarding claim 2, Huang discloses wherein the access point is further caused to: receive, from the first station or the second station, a sensing performing feedback for the sensing performing request [see para. 101-102; the base station receives, from the transmitting device or the receiving device (UE 115), a feedback for the control message].
Regarding claim 3, Huang discloses wherein the sensing performing feedback comprises at least one of the following: original sensing channel information between the first station and the second station; or data after processing, by the first station or the second station, a sensing signal of the sensing procedure [see para. 102; the feedback indicates precoding weights for one or more beam directions, and the feedback corresponds to a configured number of beams across a system bandwidth or one or more sub-bands].
Regarding claim 4, Huang discloses wherein the sensing procedure is triggered by at least one of the following: the access point; a location management device; a remote cloud node; or a terminal device that is different from the first station or the second station and has a sensing capability [see Fig. 6, 7, 20, para. 61, 91, 134, 140, 233-235, claim 28; the passive sidelink sensing procedure is triggered by the base station when it sends configuration messages to the participating devices].
Regarding claim 5, Huang discloses wherein the sensing procedure is a first sensing procedure for a sensing target, and the first sensing procedure is triggered based on at least one of the following metrics: a sensing quality of a second sensing procedure between the access point and a third station for the sensing target, wherein the third station is the first station, the second station or a station other than the first station and the second station; a sensing signal quality of the second sensing procedure; and a location of the sensing target [see para. 60, 63, 101, 112, 139, 143; the passive sidelink sensing procedure is triggered based on at least one of the following metrics: a sensing signal quality and a location of a sensing target].
Regarding claim 6, Huang discloses wherein a triggering condition of the first sensing procedure comprises at least one of the following: the sensing signal quality being lower than a signal quality threshold; a duration during which the sensing signal quality is lower than the signal quality threshold reaching an observation window duration; communication between the access point and the third station that is associated with the second sensing procedure being non-line-of-sight (NLOS) communication; a predefined sensing scenario or sensing area that is based on a sensing service; or the sensing target arriving at a predetermined location [see para. 60, 111-113, 132-133; a movement of the target object at a location].
Regarding claim 7, Huang discloses wherein the sensing performing request comprises at least one sensing configuration information of the following: an indication of sensing role assignment between the first station and the second station; sensing resource alignment information of the first station and the second station; sampling frequency of a sensing signal of the sensing procedure; sensing time information of the sensing procedure; a format of the sensing signal of the sensing procedure; and a format and a rule of a sensing performing feedback for the sensing performing request [see para. 135, 141, 234-236, claims 28-31; the control message comprises at least one sensing configuration information of the following: an indication of sensing role assignment between the transmitting device and the receiving device; sensing resource alignment information of the transmitting device and the receiving device; sampling frequency of a sensing signal of the sensing procedure; sensing time information of the sensing procedure; a format of the sensing signal of the sensing procedure].
Regarding claim 8, Huang does not explicitly disclose selecting, among a station set associated with the access point, a first target station having a sensing capability and a direct link setup capability as the first station.
However, Pushkarna teaches selecting, among a station set associated with the access point, a first target station having a sensing capability and a direct link setup capability as the first station [see Fig. 26-28, para. 103-112; AP selecting, among a station set associated with the AP, a target station having a sensing capability (WLAN sensing capability element 2600) and a direct link setup capability (TDLS link) as a WLAN sensing supported STA].
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide “an AP transmits, to a first station, a link setup request for indicating the first station to set up a direct link with a second station”, as taught by Pushkarna, into the system of Huang so that it would support opportunistic WLAN Sensing [see Pushkarna, para. 106].
Regarding claim 18, Huang discloses wherein at least one of the sensing performing request, a link query request and a link setup request is transmitted via a message having a format, and the format comprises at least one of the following: a message type field; a bitmap field; or a report information field; or at least one of the sensing performing feedback, a link query feedback or a link setup feedback is received via a message having the format [see Fig. 4, para. 125-127; a SCI message having a format 401 comprises report information field including a number of resource identifiers 420 and a number of signal parameter adjustment indications 425].
Regarding claim 19, Huang does not explicitly disclose wherein the message type field indicates one of the following: the sensing performing request; the link query request; the link setup request; the sensing performing feedback; the link query feedback; or the link setup feedback.
However, Pushkarna teaches a sensing performing request is transmitted via a message having a format, and the format comprises a message type field indicating one of the following: a sensing performing request; a link query request; a link setup request; a sensing performing feedback; a link query feedback; or a link setup feedback [see Fig. 26-28, para. 103-112; a sensing request is transmitted via a message comprises a message type field indicates a sensing performing request].
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide “a sensing performing request is transmitted via a message having a format, and the format comprises a message type field indicating one of the following: a sensing performing request; a link query request; a link setup request; a sensing performing feedback; a link query feedback; or a link setup feedback”, as taught by Pushkarna, into the system of Huang so that it would support opportunistic WLAN Sensing [see Pushkarna, para. 106].
Claims 10-13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Huang in view of Pushkarna and Seok (US 2016/0249397 A1).
Regarding claim 10, Huang does not explicitly disclose transmitting, to the first station, a link query request for direct link information between the first station and at least one other station; receiving, from the first station, a link query feedback for the link query request; and selecting, based on the link query feedback and among a station set associated with the access point, a second target station as the second station.
However, Seok teaches transmitting, to the first station, a link query request for direct link information between the first station and at least one other station; receiving, from the first station, a link query feedback for the link query request; and selecting, based on the link query feedback and among a station set associated with the access point, a second target station as the second station [see Fig. 21, para. 293-307; transmitting, to second STA, a direct link setup request for direct link information between the second STA and peer STAs; receiving, from the second STA, a direct link setup response for the direct link setup request; and selecting, based on the direct link setup response and among peer STAs associated with the AP, first STA].
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide “transmitting, to the first station, a link query request for direct link information between the first station and at least one other station; receiving, from the first station, a link query feedback for the link query request; and selecting, based on the link query feedback and among a station set associated with the access point, a second target station as the second station”, as taught by Seok, into the combined system of Huang and Pushkarna so that it would provide dynamic channel sensing for direct link in a High Efficiency WLAN (HEW) [see Seok, para. 8-10].
Regarding claim 11, Huang does not explicitly disclose wherein at least one of the following: the link query request is for polling direct link information between the first station and a plurality of other stations; or the link query feedback comprises a direct link information between the first station and any of the plurality of other stations or indicates that no direct link information exists between the first station and any of the plurality of other stations.
However, Seok teaches the link query feedback comprises the direct link information between the first station and any of the plurality of other stations [see Fig. 21, para. 293-307; the direct link setup response comprises direct-link color parameter].
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide “the link query feedback comprises the direct link information”, as taught by Seok, into the combined system of Huang and Pushkarna so that it would provide dynamic channel sensing for direct link in a High Efficiency WLAN (HEW) [see Seok, para. 8-10].
Regarding claim 12, Huang does not explicitly disclose wherein the direct link information comprises at least one of the following: a connection state of at least one direct link corresponding to the at least one other station; or a channel state of the at least one direct link.
However, Seok teaches wherein the direct link information comprises at least one of the following: a connection state of at least one direct link corresponding to the at least one other station; or a channel state of the at least one direct link [see Fig. 21, para. 293-307; direct-link color parameter].
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide “wherein the direct link information comprises at least one of the following: a connection state of at least one direct link corresponding to the at least one other station; or a channel state of the at least one direct link”, as taught by Seok, into the combined system of Huang and Pushkarna so that it would provide dynamic channel sensing for direct link in a High Efficiency WLAN (HEW) [see Seok, para. 8-10].
Regarding claim 13, Huang does not explicitly disclose determining that the link query feedback comprises the direct link information; and determining, based on the direct link information and a sensing criterion for a station, a station fulfilling the sensing criterion among the at least one other station as the second target station.
However, Seok teaches determining that the link query feedback comprises the direct link information; and determining, based on the direct link information and a sensing criterion for a station, a station fulfilling the sensing criterion among the at least one other station as the second target station [see Fig. 21, para. 293-307; the direct link setup response comprises direct-link color parameter; and determining, based on the direct-link color parameter and a HE Capabilities element, a STA fulfilling the HE Capabilities element among peer STAs as the first STA].
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide “wherein the direct link information comprises at least one of the following: a connection state of at least one direct link corresponding to the at least one other station; or a channel state of the at least one direct link”, as taught by Seok, into the combined system of Huang and Pushkarna so that it would provide dynamic channel sensing for direct link in a High Efficiency WLAN (HEW) [see Seok, para. 8-10].
Claims 16-17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Huang in view of Pushkarna and Dong (US 2025/0133591 A1).
Regarding claim 16, Huang does not explicitly disclose transmit, to the first station, a link setup request for indicating the first station to set up the direct link with the second station.
However, Dong teaches an AP transmits, to a first station, a link setup request for indicating the first station to set up a direct link with a second station [see Fig. 2, para. 40-42; AP MLD transmits, to non-AP STA MLD 1, a TDLS setup request for indicating the non-AP STA MLD 1 to set up a direct link with non-AP STA MLD 2].
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide “an AP transmits, to a first station, a link setup request for indicating the first station to set up a direct link with a second station”, as taught by Dong, into the combined system of Huang and Pushkarna so that it would improve transmission efficiency [see Dong, para. 39].
Regarding claim 17, Huang does not explicitly disclose receive, from the first station, a link setup feedback for the link setup request, wherein the link setup feedback indicates that a setup of the direct link has been completed.
However, Dong teaches the AP receives, from the first station, a link setup feedback for the link setup request, wherein the link setup feedback indicates that a setup of the direct link has been completed [see Fig. 2, para. 40-42; AP MLD receives, from the non-AP STA MLD 1, a TDLS setup response for the TDLS setup request, wherein the TDLS setup response frame indicates that a setup of the direct link has been completed].
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide “the AP receives, from the first station, a link setup feedback for the link setup request, wherein the link setup feedback indicates that a setup of the direct link has been completed”, as taught by Dong, into the combined system of Huang and Pushkarna so that it would improve transmission efficiency [see Dong, para. 39].
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 9, 14-15, and 20-21 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
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 BRIAN T LE whose telephone number is (571)270-5615. The examiner can normally be reached on M-F 9AM-6PM.
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, JAE LEE can be reached on 571-270-3936. 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.
/BRIAN T LE/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2469
Prosecution Insights