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 filed March 14, 2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive because, contrary to the Applicant’s argument, Kim discloses the argued limitation.
On page 10-13, the Applicant argues that Kim does not disclose the r-TWT SPs corresponding to different STAs may overlap with each other.
The Examiner respectfully disagrees with the above argument. In paragraph [0093]-[0094], Kim is describing the STAs are r-TWT scheduled. Referring back to figs. 3-4, it is clear that different TWT SPs corresponding to different STAs (e.g. TWT SP 430-1 corresponding to STA 421, TWT SP 430-2 corresponding to STA 422, TWT SP 430-3 corresponding to STA 423, and so on). It is also clear that each of the TWT SPs (TWT SP 430-1, 430-2, and TWT SP 430-3) associated to respective STAs (STAs 421, 422, and 423) are overlapped or aligned each other (e.g. fig. 4; paragraph [0062]).
Therefore, the above arguments is not persuasive in view of Kim and the brief response to the argument.
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.
Claims 1-7, 10-14, 16, and 18-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Kim et al. (US 2023/0413343 A1).
Regrading claim 1, Kim discloses a long-distance Wi-Fi communication method, which is performed by an apparatus (e.g. fig. 2; paragraph [0051]-[0057]; [0143]; and on, illustrating Wi-Fu communication between STA and AP), comprising: connecting with a network node at a contention access stage (paragraph [0004]; [0134]-[0135]; [0142]-[0146]; [0058]; and etc., explaining connecting the STA and AP at contention-based channel access); receiving a target wake time (TWT) configuration at the contention access stage from a network node, wherein the TWT configuration comprises a TWT service period (SP) and a TWT interval associated with the apparatus (figs. 3, 17-18, 24, 32-33, paragraph [0058]; [0157]; [0118]-[0120]; [0184]; [0204]; [0250] and so on, describing the reception of TWT configuration at the contention-based access from the AP, where the TWT configuration comprises TWT SP and interval or duration or time period related to the STA); and performing a communication with the network node during the TWT SP based on the TWT configuration at a contention-free stage (paragraph [0250]; [0143]-[0145]; and so on, the STA communicates with the AP during the TWT SP at a contention-free channel access), wherein the TWT SP associated with the apparatus overlaps with another TWT SP associated with another apparatus (figs. 3-4; 7-8, 14-15,19-21, paragraph [0062]; [0093]; [0113]; and so on); wherein the another TWT SP is configured to the another apparatus by the network to communicate with the network node during the another TWT SP (figs. 3-4; paragraph [0058]-[0062]; and so on).
Regarding claim 11, Kim discloses a long-distance Wi-Fi communication method, which is performed by a network node (e.g. fig. 2; paragraph [0051]-[0057]; [0143]; and on), comprising: connecting with at least one station (STA) at a contention access stage (paragraph [0004]; [0134]-[0135]; [0142]-[0146]; [0058]; and etc.); transmitting at least one target wake time (TWT) configuration to the at least one STA at the contention access stage, wherein each TWT configuration comprises a TWT service period (SP) and a TWT interval associated with the STA (figs. 3, 17-18, 24, 32-33, paragraph [0058]; [0157]; [0118]-[0120]; [0184]; [0204]; [0250] and so on); and performing a communication with the at least one STA during the corresponding TWT SP based on the at least one TWT configuration at a contention-free stage (paragraph [0250]; [0143]-[0145]; and so on), wherein the at least one STA comprises a first STA and a second STA, the first TWT SP associated with the first STA overlaps with a second TWT SP associated with a second STA (figs. 3-4, 7-8, 14-15,19-21, paragraph [0058]-[0062]; [0093]; [0113]; and so on).
Regarding claim 18, the claim includes features identical to the subject matter mentioned in the rejected to claim 1. The claim is a mere reformulation of claim 1 in order to define the corresponding apparatus, and the rejection to claim 1 is applied hereto.
Regarding claim 2, Kim discloses wherein the step of performing the communication with the network node comprises receiving or transmitting a data frame or a management frame from or to the network node (paragraph [0063]-[0064]; [0071]; [0080]; [0092]-[0094]; [0097]-[0098]; and etc.).
Regarding claim 3, 13, and 20, Kim further discloses comprising: not receiving or transmitting data from or to the network node at the contention access stage (paragraph [0143]-[0145]; [0152]-[0156]; and so on).
Regarding claim 4, 14, and 19, Kim discloses wherein the TWT configuration is transmitted by the network node through an un-solicited response at the contention access stage (paragraph [0070]-[0071; [0078]).
Regarding claim 5, Kim further discloses comprising: receiving a trigger frame from the network node at a beginning of the TWT SP (paragraph [0076]; [0080]-[0081];[0083]-[0084]; [0120]-[0121]; [0124]-[0126]; [0129]-[0131]; [0133]-[0140]; and so on); transmitting a power saving (PS)-poll frame to the network node to indicate the start of handshake of the TWT SP (paragraph [0080]; [0084]; and etc.); and receiving an acknowledgement (ACK) frame for the PS-poll frame from the network node during the TWT SP (paragraph [0080]; [0084]; and so on).
Regarding claim 6, Kim discloses the step of performing the communication with the network node further comprising: receiving a downlink (DL) data frame from the network node during the TWT SP (figs. 7-9; paragraph [0080]; [0084]; [0089]); and transmitting a block acknowledgement (BA) frame for the DL data frame to the network node during the TWT SP (figs. 7-9; paragraph [0080]; [0084]; [0089]).
Regarding claim 7, Kim discloses the step of performing the communication with the network node further comprising: receiving a buffer state report poll (BSRP) frame from the network node during the TWT SP (paragraph [0133]; [0154]; [0193]; [0228]; [0248]-[0252]); transmitting a buffer state report (BSR) in response to the BSRP to the network node during the TWT SP (paragraph [0133]); receiving a BA frame for the BSR from the network node during the TWT SP (paragraph [0133]); receiving a trigger frame from the network node during the TWT SP (paragraph [0120]-[0121]; [0135]; [0224]; and so on); and transmitting an uplink (UL) trigger-based (TB) packet protocol data unit (PDDU) to the network node during the TWT SP (paragraph [0124]; [0172]-[0173]; [0241]-[0242]; and so on).
Regarding claim 10, Kim further discloses comprising: setting a timer to a specific value to disable the contention access procedure after receiving the TWT configuration (paragraph [0212]; [0205]-[0206]; [0186]).
Regarding claim 12, Kim discloses wherein the step of performing the communication with the at least one STA comprises transmitting or receiving a data frame or a management frame to or from the at least one STA to realize a time division multiple access (TDMA) communication (paragraph [0063]-[0064]; [0071]; [0080]; [0092]-[0094]; [0097]-[0098]; and etc.).
Regarding claim 16, Kim discloses when the communication between the first STA and the network node is completed before the first TWT SP ends, the method further comprises: transmitting a trigger frame to the second STA at in a section of the second TWT SP overlapping with the first TWT SP after the communication between the first STA and the network node is completed (figs. 3-4, 7-8, 14-15,19-21, paragraph [0058]-[0062]; [0093]; [0113]; and so on); receiving a PS-Poll frame for indicating a start of handshake of the second TWT SP from the second STA during the second TWT SP; and transmitting an acknowledgement (ACK) frame for the PS-poll frame to the second STA during the second TWT SP (figs. 7-8, 14-15, and19-21).
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.
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.
Claims 9 and 17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kim over Jeong et al. (US 2018/0213464 A1).
Regarding claim 9 and 17, as applied above, Kim discloses block acknowledgement (BA) and acknowledgement (ACK). However, Kim doesn’t disclose comprising: setting a BA waiting timeout or an ACK waiting timeout in the long-distance Wi-Fi communication, wherein the BA waiting timeout or the ACK waiting timeout in the long-distance Wi-Fi communication is longer than a default BA waiting timeout or a default ACK waiting timeout.
Jeong teaches BA and ACK. However, Kim doesn’t disclose comprising: setting a BA waiting timeout or an ACK waiting timeout in the long-distance Wi-Fi communication, wherein the BA waiting timeout or the ACK waiting timeout in the long-distance Wi-Fi communication is longer than a default BA waiting timeout or a default ACK waiting timeout (paragraph [0213]; [0236]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective date of the invention to use BA and ACK. However, Kim doesn’t disclose comprising: setting a BA waiting timeout or an ACK waiting timeout in the long-distance Wi-Fi communication, wherein the BA waiting timeout or the ACK waiting timeout in the long-distance Wi-Fi communication is longer than a default BA waiting timeout or a default ACK waiting timeout as taught by Jeong into Kim in order to improve efficiency and quality of communication.
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 KIBROM T HAILU whose telephone number is (571)270-1209. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8:00 AM to 5:30 PM.
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, HUY D VU can be reached at (571)272-3155. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of published or unpublished applications may be obtained from Patent Center. Unpublished application information in Patent Center is available to registered users. To file and manage patent submissions in Patent Center, visit: https://patentcenter.uspto.gov. Visit https://www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/patent-center for more information about Patent Center and https://www.uspto.gov/patents/docx for information about filing in DOCX format. For additional questions, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/KIBROM T HAILU/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2461
Prosecution Insights