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 .
Claims 1-20 are pending.
Claim Objections
Claims 2 and 19 are objected to because of the following informalities: “NSTR” abbreviation should be clearly indicated. 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)(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, 3-5, 14, 18, 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Ding et al. US 20240097859.
Regarding claim 1, A wireless communication method, comprising: transmitting, by an access point (AP) multilink device (MLD) (Multi-AP Coordination or Multi-link transmission, when multi-link APs are involved, are utilized such that information about subsequent transmission is shared among the APs, such as transmission type, parameters of PPDU carrying the expected BlockAck frame, para. 0072, Sharing AP and Shared AP, Figure 12), a first information on a primary link to a first non-access point station (non-AP STA) in a first non-AP MLD; or transmitting, by the AP MLD, the first information on the primary link to the first non-AP STA; synchronously transmitting, by the AP MLD, a second information on a non-primary link to a second non-AP STA in a second non-AP MLD, wherein the second information is configured to share a transmission opportunity (TXOP), which is obtained by the AP MLD on the non-primary link, to the second non-AP STA (if synchronous transmission is indicated, Sharing AP controls all frequency resources till the end of the obtained TXOP, para. 0077, the Sharing AP and Shared AP transmit data, in which the parameters of PPDU carrying BlockAck frame is contained, simultaneously on their own frequency resources subject to parameters indicated in the EHT PPDU, Figure 12, element 1204, transmitted from Sharing AP to STA1 and EHT PPDU, element 1206, transmitted from Shared AP to STA2, para. 0078); wherein the first information is configured to indicate a length of an uplink physical layer protocol data unit (PPDU) transmitted on the primary link, the second information is configured to indicate a length of an uplink PPDU transmitted on the non-primary link, and the uplink PPDU on the primary link and the PPDU on the non-primary link are transmitted synchronously (parameters needed for the synchronous transmission is indicated in the frames, element 1202, 1204, such as parameters of PPDU carrying BlockAck frame for PPDU Format, para. 0077, the Sharing AP and Shared AP(s) transmit data, in which the parameters of PPDU carrying BlockAck frame is contained, simultaneously on their own frequency resources, para. 0078, the parameters are decided based on a maximal length of bitmap in BlockAck frame by Sharing AP, para. 0083, the Sharing AP decides to solicit a PPDU with length L.sub.1 to carry the BlockAck frame and indicates it to Shared AP, the Shared AP has an A-MPDU in which 180 MPDUs are carried in the transmit queue, the length of bitmap in the expected BlockAck frame should be 32 octets and the Shared AP calculates the expected length of PPDU carrying the expected BlockAck frame, para. 0084).
Regarding claim 3, The wireless communication method according to claim 1, wherein, the first information is carried via a frame, which is configured to reply to data transmission; and/or the second information is carried via a frame, which is transmitted after the TXOP is obtained (if synchronous transmission is indicated, Sharing AP controls all frequency resources till the end of the obtained TXOP, para. 0077, the Sharing AP and Shared AP transmit data, in which the parameters of PPDU carrying BlockAck frame is contained, simultaneously on their own frequency resources subject to parameters indicated in the EHT PPDU, Figure 12, element 1204, transmitted from Sharing AP to STA1 and EHT PPDU, element 1206, transmitted from Shared AP to STA2, para. 0078).
Regarding claim 4, The wireless communication method according to claim 3, wherein, the frame, which is configured to reply to the data transmission, comprises a control wrapper frame or a block acknowledgement (BA) frame (the Sharing AP and Shared AP transmit data, in which the parameters of PPDU carrying BlockAck frame is contained, simultaneously on their own frequency resources subject to parameters indicated in the EHT PPDU, Figure 12, element 1204, transmitted from Sharing AP to STA1 and EHT PPDU, element 1206, transmitted from Shared AP to STA2, para. 0078, the Sharing AP and Shared AP(s) may indicate parameters of PPDU carrying BlockAck frame by reusing the TRS Control subfield of the HE variant HT Control field to associated STAs, HT Control field is always present in a Control Wrapper frame and is present in Quality of Service (QoS) Data and Management frames when +HTC subfield of the Frame Control field is set as 1, TRS Control subfield indicates partial parameters of PPDU carrying BlockAck frame, para. 0085).
Regarding claim 5, The wireless communication method according to claim 3, wherein, the frame, which is transmitted after the TXOP is obtained, comprises a trigger frame or a multiple users request-to-send (MU-RTS) frame (if synchronous transmission is indicated, Sharing AP controls all frequency resources till the end of the obtained TXOP, para. 0077, the Sharing AP and Shared AP transmit data, in which the parameters of PPDU carrying BlockAck frame is contained, simultaneously on their own frequency resources subject to parameters indicated in MAP Trigger frame i.e. EHT PPDU 1204 transmitted from Sharing AP to STA1 and EHT PPDU 1206 transmitted from Shared AP to STA2, para. 0078).
Regarding claim 14, The wireless communication method according to claim 1, wherein, the first information is transmitted via a first frame, the second information is transmitted via a second frame; a value of an uplink length sub-field carried in the first frame is the same as a value of an uplink length sub-field carried in the second frame (parameters needed for the synchronous transmission is indicated in the frames, MAP Trigger frame i.e. EHT PPDU 1204 transmitted from Sharing AP to STA1 and EHT PPDU 1206 transmitted from Shared AP to STA2, such as parameters of PPDU carrying BlockAck frame for PPDU Format, para. 0077-0078, the parameters are decided based on a maximal length of bitmap in BlockAck frame by Sharing AP, para. 0083, the parameters such as PPDU length, number of EHT-LTF symbols, of PPDU carrying the MAP Response frame may be set as a predefined default parameters list or the necessary parameters may be indicated in the MAP Trigger frame, para. 0096).
Claim 18 and 20 are rejected under the same rationale.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
The factual inquiries 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.
Claim(s) 2, 19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ding et al. in view of Kim et al. US 20240163948.
Regarding claim 2, Ding does not disclose the wireless communication method according to claim 1, wherein, the AP MLD comprises at least one NSTR link pair in which receiving and transmission are not performed simultaneously, and one link pair of the at least one NSTR link pair comprises the primary link and the non-primary link. Kim discloses each of the non-AP MLD and the AP-MLD communicates using three links, the AP MLD includes a first AP, a second AP, and a third AP, the non-AP MLD includes a first non-AP STA, a second non-AP STA and a third non-AP STA, the first AP and the first non-AP STA communicate through a first link, the second AP and the second non-AP STA communicate through a second link, the third AP and the third non-AP STA communicate through a third link, Figure 9. Kim discloses when the MLD operates STAs in a particular link pair, if STR is supported between the two STAs operated in the particular link pair, the particular link pair may be considered by the MLD as an STR link pair, when the MLD operates STAs in another link pair, if STR is not supported between the two STAs operated in the other link pair, the other link pair may be considered by the MLD as an NSTR link pair, para. 0136. Before the filing of the invention it would have been obvious to modify Ding to include Kim’s non-AP and AP-MLD system and STR and NSTR link pairs. One of ordinary skill in the art would be motivated to do so to support a transmission rate of up to 30 Gbps via a wider bandwidth, an increased spatial stream, multi-AP cooperation in a 2.4/5/6 GHz band for different multimedia applications, para. 0007.
Claim 19 is rejected under the same rationale.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 6-13, 15-17 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
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MELANIE JAGANNATHAN whose telephone number is (571)272-3163. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9-5.
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, Marcus Smith can be reached at 571-270-1096. 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.
/MELANIE JAGANNATHAN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2468