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 Objections
Claim 3 is objected to because of the following informalities: A period(“.”) has been omitted in claim 3.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claim(s) 10 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor, or for pre-AIA the applicant regards as the invention.
Claim 10 recites the limitations "a first transceiver compatible with a first wireless communications protocol;" in line 2 and "a second transceiver compatible with a first wireless communications protocol," in line 3. The limitations renders the claims indefinite as it is unclear whether the first wireless communications protocol of the first transceiver and the first wireless communications protocol of the second transceiver are the same protocol or different protocols.
Turning to instant specification (para [0012] of instant specification), Applicants discloses “For example, a transceiver compatible with a first wireless protocol, such as a Wi-Fi protocol, may be collocated with a transceiver compatible with a second wireless protocol, such as a Bluetooth protocol.”
As best understood by the examiner in light of the written description, the language “a second transceiver compatible with a first wireless communications protocol" should be “a second transceiver compatible with a second wireless communications protocol”.
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(s) 1, 2, 10, and 16 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Ghosh et al. (U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 20210204140, hereinafter “Ghosh”).
Examiner’s note: in what follows, references are drawn to Ghosh unless otherwise mentioned.
Ghosh discloses “Apparatus and method for coexistence between wi-fi communication and Bluetooth communication” and comprises the following features:
With respect to independent claims:
Regarding claim 1, A method comprising: Ghosh teaches:
identifying, using one or more processing elements, wireless activity associated with a first transceiver (Fig. 7 and para [0053]: As shown in FIG. 7, the coexistence mechanism … from both of the Wi-Fi module (interpreted as “a first transceiver”) and the Bluetooth module (interpreted as “a second transceiver”).) (para [0041]: Bluetooth operation may request to reserve data channels with collocated Wi-Fi operation by using puncturing in the secondary channel as shown in FIG. 4.) (para [0056]: the Bluetooth module may exchange its scheduling needs (e.g., BLE advertising, BR/EDR inquiry/paging etc.) to the Wi-Fi module (interpreted as “identifying, using one or more processing elements, wireless activity associated with a first transceiver”).), the first transceiver being collocated with a second transceiver (para [0053]: Combo Wi-Fi module (interpreted as “a first transceiver”) and Bluetooth module (interpreted as “a second transceiver”) of a device (e.g., a UE) may implement a coexistence mechanism to optimally schedule respective RF transmission and reception.)(para [0054]: It may be advantageous to inform the collocated Wi-Fi module (interpreted as “the first transceiver being collocated with a second transceiver”) a little ahead in time about the traffic schedule of the Bluetooth module using the non-real time interface,) (Fig. 12 and para [0093]: the processing circuitry 1206 (interpreted as “one or more processing elements”) may be configured to perform operations detailed in the above figures, diagrams, and flows.);
generating, using the one or more processing elements, a puncture pattern for the first transceiver based, at least in part, on the identified wireless activity, the puncture pattern identifying an unused plurality of sub-channels of the first transceiver (para [0054]: It may be advantageous to inform the collocated Wi-Fi module a little ahead in time about the traffic schedule of the Bluetooth module using the non-real time interface, so that the collocated Wi-Fi module can make use of the non-real time scheduling information to reserve or adjust usage of frequency and time resources with link layer or MAC protocol messaging)(para [0055]: when the Bluetooth module sends schedule information to the Wi-Fi module of the device via the non-real time interface, the Wi-Fi module of the device needs time to update its puncturing schedule with the Wi-Fi AP that is connected with the device.) (para [0058]: The event schedule information is to indicate information about a schedule of the Bluetooth communication. In some embodiments, the event schedule information may include information about a bandwidth of the sub-channel required by the Bluetooth communication,...) (Examiner’s note: The ‘puncturing schedule’ discussed in para [0055] is interpreted as “a puncture pattern for the first transceiver”. The operation of making and updating the puncturing schedule discussed in paragraphs [0054-0055] corresponds to the claimed limitation “generating, using the one or more processing elements, a puncture pattern for the first transceiver based, at least in part, on the identified wireless activity”. The ‘to reserve or adjust usage of frequency and time resources’ discussed in para [0054] is interpreted as “identifying an unused plurality of sub-channels of the first transceiver”.); and
generating, using the one or more processing elements, a hopping pattern for the second transceiver based, at least in part, on the puncture pattern, the hopping pattern identifying a sequence of sub-channels used by the second transceiver for wireless activity, and the hopping pattern including at least some of the plurality of sub-channels identified by the puncture pattern. (Para [0040]: In a scenario where Bluetooth Adaptive Frequency Hopping (AFH) is applicable for data or audio connections, Bluetooth uses adaptive frequency hopping to select usable channels, e.g., in the 2.4 GHz band.) (para [0041]: FIG. 4 illustrates an example of Wi-Fi interference on Bluetooth connection. ... Bluetooth operation may request to reserve data channels with collocated Wi-Fi operation by using puncturing in the secondary channel as shown in FIG. 4.)(para [0047]: FIG. 6 illustrates an example of a punctured 20 MHz channel in different configurations of 80 MHz channel bandwidth. As shown in FIG. 6, preamble puncturing in 80 MHz is depicted with secondary 20 MHz channel (S20), lower (left) secondary 40 MHz channel (S40-L) and upper (right) secondary 40 MHz channel (S40-R) punctured respectively (interpreted as “a sequence of sub-channels used by the second transceiver for wireless activity”).) Fig. 6 of Ghosh is reproduced herein below.
PNG
media_image1.png
416
794
media_image1.png
Greyscale
(para [0048]: As shown in FIG. 6, an intermediate 20 MHz is punctured, assuming Bluetooth operation is in one of the 2 MHz channel within the punctured 20 MHz channel bandwidth. The figure also depicts that the Wi-Fi signal still spans over the primary 20 MHz channel and the secondary 40 MHz channel, while coexisting with Bluetooth in the intermediate secondary channel.)(para [0087]: by using puncturing scheme discussed in this disclosure, the transmission and reception on AFH channels (“Bluetooth Adaptive Frequency Hopping (AFH)” channels, see para [0040]) in densely used Wi-Fi environments can be protected, the robustness of the Bluetooth links can be improved, and the user experience can be enhanced.).
Examiner’s note: Regarding the “a hopping pattern”, the claim recites “the hopping pattern identifying a sequence of sub-channels used by the second transceiver for wireless activity, and the hopping pattern including at least some of the plurality of sub-channels identified by the puncture pattern”. Turning to the Specification of the instant application, the instant application discloses that, in para [0016], the hopping pattern may be a data object configured to identify active or used sub-channels of a transceiver, as well as a sequence of their respective use and, in para [0056], the hopping pattern may include sub-channels within the designated bandwidth of the first transceiver, and the hopping of the second transceiver may be bounded within the punctured sub-channels that are unused by the first transceiver. Thus, the punctured pattern (depicted in Fig. 6 of Ghosh) including secondary 20 MHz channel (S20), lower (left) secondary 40 MHz channel (S40-L) and upper (right) secondary 40 MHz channel (S40-R) and the discussions in paragraphs [0040, 0041, 0047, 0048, and 0087] of Ghosh teach the claimed feature “a hopping pattern for the second transceiver based, at least in part, on the puncture pattern, the hopping pattern identifying a sequence of sub-channels used by the second transceiver for wireless activity, and the hopping pattern including at least some of the plurality of sub-channels identified by the puncture pattern”.
Regarding claim 10, it is a system claim corresponding to the method claim 1, and is therefore rejected for the similar reasons set forth in the rejection of claim 1.
Regarding claim 16, it is a device claim corresponding to the method claim 1, and is therefore rejected for the similar reasons set forth in the rejection of claim 1.
With respect to dependent claims:
Regarding claim 2, Ghosh teaches The method of claim 1, Ghosh further teaches wherein the first transceiver is a Wi-Fi transceiver, and wherein the second transceiver is a Bluetooth transceiver, an 802.15.4 transceiver, or a narrowband internet-of-things transceiver (para [0053]: Combo Wi-Fi module (interpreted as “a first transceiver”) and Bluetooth module (interpreted as “a second transceiver”) of a device (e.g., a UE) may implement a coexistence mechanism to optimally schedule respective RF transmission and reception.).
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) 3, 5-9, 11, 13-15, 17, and 19-20 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ghosh in view of Sun et al. (U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 20220376824, hereinafter “Sun”).
Regarding claim 3, Ghosh teachｅｓ The method of claim 1, wherein the generating of the puncture pattern comprises:
Ghosh fails to specifically teach generating a bitmap data structure identifying the unused plurality of sub-channels.
In analogous art, Sun teaches “generating a bitmap data structure identifying the unused plurality of sub-channels” (Fig. 8C and para [0116] of Sun: the bitmap 820 having index 13 shown as [xxx11111] indicates that the 1st, 2nd, and 3rd 40 MHz subchannels (interpreted as “unused plurality of sub-channels”) of the 320 MHz bandwidth are punctured (thereby resulting in a contiguous 120 MHz punctured subchannel).
Ghosh and Sun are both considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because they are in the same field of puncturing-based communication in Wireless Lan System. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of instant application to modify Ghosh's method by incorporating the features of Sun in order to provide a bitmap data structure identifying the unused plurality of sub-channels for wireless transmissions. The rationale for doing so would have been to allow the transmission and reception on AFH channels to be protected in densely used Wi-Fi environments (see para [0087] of Ghosh).
Regarding claim 5, Ghosh and Sun teach The method of claim 3,
Sun further teaches:
wherein the bitmap data structure is encoded (para [0142] of Sun: the STA 1404 decodes the bitmap, obtains the first puncturing pattern (interpreted as “the bitmap data structure is encoded”))
Regarding claim 6, Ghosh and Sun teach The method of claim 3,
Sun further teaches:
wherein the bitmap data structure is included in a data packet (para [0141] of Sun: The AP 1402 sends an indication of the first puncturing pattern over the wireless channel 1405 to the STA 1404. The indication may be a bitmap including a plurality of bits (the indication transmitted from AP 1402 is interpreted as “a data packet”), where each bit of the bitmap indicates whether a corresponding subchannel of the wireless channel 1405 is punctured (or not punctured)) (para [0153] of Sun: In this case, the AP 1402 may use the single bit to explicitly indicate which of the candidate puncturing patterns has been selected as the second puncturing pattern. The bitmap or bit may be carried in an EHT operation element of a beacon frame, an association response frame, a probe response frame, an action frame, or another suitable frame or packet. In other instances, the bitmap may be carried in another portion of a frame.).
Regarding claim 7, Ghosh teaches The method of claim 1,
Ghosh fails to specifically teach the wherein the unused plurality of sub-channels is noncontiguous.
In analogous art, Sun teaches
the wherein the unused plurality of sub-channels is noncontiguous (Figs. 8, 13b and para [0116] of Sun: the bitmap 820 having index 14 shown as [xx1x1111] indicates that the 1st, 2nd, and 4th 40 MHz subchannels (interpreted as “unused plurality of sub-channels is noncontiguous”) of the 320 MHz bandwidth are punctured) (also see index 14 in Fig. 13b of Sun). Fig. 13b of Sun is reproduced herein below.
PNG
media_image2.png
578
892
media_image2.png
Greyscale
(Fig. 13B of Sun)
Regarding claim 8, Ghosh teaches The method of claim 1,
Ghosh fails to specifically teach wherein the unused plurality of sub-channels comprises a plurality of portions of contiguous sub-channels.
Sun teaches:
wherein the unused plurality of sub-channels comprises a plurality of portions of contiguous sub-channels (see index 14 (“[xxxx11xx11111111]”) in Fig. 13c of Sun).
Examiner’s note: In Fig. 13c of Sun, a plurality of portions of contiguous sub-channels (1st portion is “xxxx (1st, 2nd, 3rd and 4th)”, and 2nd portion is “xx (7th and 8th)” in index 14) are punctured).
Regarding claim 9, Ghosh and Sun teach The method of claim 8,
Sun further teaches wherein the plurality of portions of contiguous sub-channels has different sizes Sun teaches the a plurality of portions of contiguous sub-channels (see index 14 (“[xxxx11xx11111111]”) in Fig. 13c of Sun).
Examiner’s note: In Fig. 13c of Sun, the plurality of portions of contiguous sub-channels (1st portion is “xxxx (1st, 2nd, 3rd and 4th)”, and 2nd portion is “xx (7th and 8th)” in index 14) has different sizes).
Regarding claim 11, Claim 11 has similar limitation as of Claim 3, therefore it is rejected under the same reasons as Claim 3.
Regarding claim 13, Claim 13 has similar limitation as of Claim 5, therefore it is rejected under the same reasons as Claim 5.
Regarding claim 14, Claim 14 has similar limitation as of Claim 7, therefore it is rejected under the same reasons as Claim 7.
Regarding claim 15, Claim 15 has similar limitation as of Claim 9, therefore it is rejected under the same reasons as Claim 9.
Regarding claim 17, Claim 17 has similar limitation as of Claim 3, therefore it is rejected under the same reasons as Claim 3.
Regarding claim 19, Claim 19 has similar limitation as of Claim 7, therefore it is rejected under the same reasons as Claim 7.
Regarding claim 20, Claim 20 has similar limitation as of Claim 9, therefore it is rejected under the same reasons as Claim 9.
Claim(s) 4, 12, and 18 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ghosh in view of Sun, and further in view of Park et al. (U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 20250219764, hereinafter “Park”).
Regarding claim 4, Ghosh and Sun teach The method of claim 3 further comprising: Ghosh and Sun fail to teach
transmitting the bitmap data structure from the first transceiver to the second transceiver.
In analogous art, Park teaches the transmitting the bitmap data structure from the first transceiver to the second transceiver (para [0053] of Park: LAN is an independent BSS (IBSS). … BSS1 containing only STA1 (interpreted as “first transceiver”) and STA2 (Examiner’s note: STA 2 is interpreted as the “second transceiver” collocated with the first transceiver because both STA1and STA2 are co-located within the AP’s coverage area (BSS1) and communicate by sharing the same wireless communication resources. See Fig. 2 and para [0051] of Park ) (para [0213] of Park: When OFDMA transmission method is applied/set, 80 MHz puncturing pattern may be indicated in bitmap manner through 4 bits of 5-bit punctured channel information field.) (para [0219] of Park: A first STA may generate a Physical layer Protocol Data Unit (PPDU) including a first U (universal)-signal (SIG) field related to a first bandwidth and a second U-SIG field related to a second bandwidth (S1510).)(para [0222] of Park: The first U-SIG field may include a first punctured channel information field indicating a first puncturing pattern among a plurality of puncturing patterns corresponding to the first bandwidth.)(para [0223] of Park: The second U-SIG field may include a second punctured channel information field indicating first and second puncturing patterns among a plurality of puncturing patterns corresponding to the second bandwidth.) (para [0233]: The first STA may transmit a PPDU including a first U-SIG field and a second U-SIG field to the second STA).
Ghosh, Sun, and Park are considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because they are in the same field of puncturing-based communication in Wireless Lan System. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of instant application to modify the combination of Ghosh and Sun by incorporating the features of Park in order to transmit the bitmap data structure of a puncturing pattern from the first transceiver to second transceiver. The rationale for doing so would have been to allow the transmission and reception on AFH channels to be protected in densely used Wi-Fi environments (see para [0087] of Ghosh).
Regarding claim 12, Claim 12 has similar limitation as of Claim 4, therefore it is rejected under the same reasons as Claim 4.
Regarding claim 18, Claim 18 has similar limitation as of Claim 4, therefore it is rejected under the same reasons as Claim 4.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to WON JUN CHOI whose telephone number is (703)756-1695. The examiner can normally be reached MON-FRI 08:00 - 17:00.
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, Derrick W Ferris can be reached at 571-272-3123. 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.
/WON JUN CHOI/Examiner, Art Unit 2411
/DERRICK W FERRIS/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2411