DETAILED ACTION
This office action is responsive to communications filed on March 19, 2026. Claims 1-20 are pending in the application.
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 Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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.
(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 1-3, 5-8, 14-16, and 18-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) and 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Doostnejad et al. (US 2020/0213160).
Regarding Claim 1, Doostnejad teaches a communication method, comprising:
sending, by a sensing initiating device to a first sensing responding device, a first indication indicating that the first sensing responding device is used as a sensing receiver (“the AP can send a trigger frame to STAs to solicit poll responses and if an STA is ready for implicit channel sounding, the STA will send a poll response to AP” – See [0043]; The AP (sensing initiating device) sends a trigger frame (first indication) to an STA (first sensing responding device) soliciting channel sounding feedback from the STA (i.e., indicating that the first sensing responding device is used as a sensing receiver)); and
sending, by the sensing initiating device to the first sensing responding device, a second indication indicating the first sensing responding device to feed back a truncated time domain channel estimation and sensing sequence (“a system may facilitate an enhanced time domain compressed feedback approach to reduce the overhead due to the channel sounding feedback for downlink (DL)/uplink (UL) multi-user (MU) multiple-input multiple-output (MIMO) or multiple AP joint transmission” – See [0049]; “The value of the threshold can be indicated by the AP in the NDPA frame preceding the NDP frame used for channel sounding. The threshold may also be included in the STA's CSI report as a compression rate reference for the AP side” – See [0124]; “The normalized threshold is defined as the ratio between the threshold and the maximum absolute value of time domain channel impulse response. It may be seen that the larger the threshold, the less the samples need to be feedback” – See [0145]; “this NDPA can also define the order of the AP and include the association identification (AID) information associated with the STAs which are requested to process the following NDP frames. After the STAs in AP1's BSS and the STAs in AP2's BSS receive the NDPA sent by AP1, the STAs will decode the NDPA frame and extract the parameter information for the NDP frame that will follow. After short inter-frame space (SIFS) time of sending the NDPA, the AP1 sends the downlink (DL) NDP, and based on the DL NDP, the STAs in AP1's BSS and the STAs in AP2's BSS can obtain a channel estimation for the downlink channel between the AP1 and the STA” – See [0066]; The AP sends an NDPA frame (second indication) to the STA indicating a threshold value based on which the STA determines a compressed/truncated time domain CSI feedback and wherein the NDPA frame also comprises the parameter information for an NDP which is a sounding/sensing sequence that the STA uses to estimate the CSI).
Regarding Claim 2, Doostnejad teaches the method of Claim 1. Doostnejad further teaches receiving, by the sensing initiating device from the first sensing responding device, the truncated time domain channel estimation and sensing sequence; and performing, by the sensing initiating device, a channel estimation and target sensing based on the truncated time domain channel estimation and sensing sequence (“for the CSI report, AP1 uses a trigger frame to solicits CSI from both AP1's and AP2's STAs” – See [0076]; “after the channel sounding and CSI feedback, AP1 and AP2 can use the CSI information to design the beamforming vector for data transmission” – See [0077]; The AP receives the compressed/truncated time domain CSI feedback and sequence from the STA, and uses the feedback to estimate the channel state for assigning beamforming vectors).
Regarding Claim 3, Doostnejad teaches the method of Claim 2. Doostnejad further teaches that the truncated time domain channel estimation and sensing sequence fed back by the first sensing responding device is a part of a time domain long training field (LTF) sequence received by the first sensing responding device; and the receiving the truncated time domain channel estimation and sensing sequence comprises: receiving, by the sensing initiating device from the first sensing responding device, the truncated time domain channel estimation and sensing sequence by using a truncated long training field (T-LTF) frame (“downlink channel sounding is to use explicit channel state information (CSI) feedback, and in the legacy systems explicit CSI feedback, after the STA gets the channel estimation based on the LTF field, the STA uses singular value decomposition (SVD) to decompose the channel matrix and feed the compressed singular vector which corresponds to the first N largest singular values to the AP” – See [0032]; The channel estimation/sensing sequence fed back by the STA is part of an LTF field received by the STA, and the AP receives, from the STA, the compressed/truncated time domain CSI feedback based on the truncated LTF).
Regarding Claim 5, Doostnejad teaches the method of Claim 2. Doostnejad further teaches that the truncated time domain channel estimation and sensing sequence fed back by the first sensing responding device is a part of a time domain channel estimation field (CEF) sequence received by the first sensing responding device; and the receiving the truncated time domain channel estimation and sensing sequence comprises: receiving, by the sensing initiating device from the first sensing responding device, the truncated time domain channel estimation and sensing sequence by using a sensing feedback element field (“The value of the threshold can be indicated by the AP in the NDPA frame preceding the NDP frame used for channel sounding. The threshold may also be included in the STA's CSI report as a compression rate reference for the AP side” – See [0124]; “The normalized threshold is defined as the ratio between the threshold and the maximum absolute value of time domain channel impulse response. It may be seen that the larger the threshold, the less the samples need to be feedback” – See [0145]; “this NDPA can also define the order of the AP and include the association identification (AID) information associated with the STAs which are requested to process the following NDP frames. After the STAs in AP1's BSS and the STAs in AP2's BSS receive the NDPA sent by AP1, the STAs will decode the NDPA frame and extract the parameter information for the NDP frame that will follow. After short inter-frame space (SIFS) time of sending the NDPA, the AP1 sends the downlink (DL) NDP, and based on the DL NDP, the STAs in AP1's BSS and the STAs in AP2's BSS can obtain a channel estimation for the downlink channel between the AP1 and the STA” – See [0066]; See also Figs. 20 and 21; Together, the threshold (truncated time domain channel estimation) and NDP parameters (sensing sequence) included in the NDPA frame are channel estimation fields that are received by the STA (first sensing responding device), and the AP (sensing initiating device) receives, from the STA, the compressed/truncated time domain CSI feedback and sequence in a sensing feedback element field of the CSI feedback).
Regarding Claim 6, Doostnejad teaches the method of Claim 1. Doostnejad further teaches sending, by the sensing initiating device to a second sensing responding device, a third indication indicating that the second sensing responding device is used as a sensing sender; sending, by the sensing initiating device to the second sensing responding device, the second indication further indicating the second sensing responding device to perform a channel estimation and target sensing based on the truncated time domain channel estimation and sensing sequence fed back by the first sensing responding device (“the AP can send a trigger frame to STAs to solicit poll responses and if an STA is ready for implicit channel sounding, the STA will send a poll response to AP” – See [0043]; “this NDPA can also define the order of the AP and include the association identification (AID) information associated with the STAs which are requested to process the following NDP frames. After the STAs in AP1's BSS and the STAs in AP2's BSS receive the NDPA sent by AP1, the STAs will decode the NDPA frame and extract the parameter information for the NDP frame that will follow. After short inter-frame space (SIFS) time of sending the NDPA, the AP1 sends the downlink (DL) NDP, and based on the DL NDP, the STAs in AP1's BSS and the STAs in AP2's BSS can obtain a channel estimation for the downlink channel between the AP1 and the STA” – See [0066]; Since the trigger frame is sent to multiple STAs, it is also a third indication to a second STA (second sensing responding device) indicating that the second sensing responding device is used as a sensing sender by sending CSI feedback, and since the NDPA frame is sent to multiple STAs, it is also a second indication for the second STA to perform the channel estimation in conjunction with the compressed/truncated time domain CSI feedback and sensing sequence fed back by the first STA).
Regarding Claim 7, Doostnejad teaches the method of Claim 1. Doostnejad further teaches sending, by the sensing initiating device to the first sensing responding device, a fourth indication about a truncation ratio of the time domain channel estimation and sensing sequence (“The value of the threshold can be indicated by the AP in the NDPA frame preceding the NDP frame used for channel sounding. The threshold may also be included in the STA's CSI report as a compression rate reference for the AP side” – See [0124]; “The normalized threshold is defined as the ratio between the threshold and the maximum absolute value of time domain channel impulse response. It may be seen that the larger the threshold, the less the samples need to be feedback” – See [0145]; The threshold sent from the AP to the STA is a fourth indication that indicates a time domain compression rate/truncation ratio of the CSI feedback).
Regarding Claim 8, Doostnejad teaches the method of Claim 1. Doostnejad further teaches that the sending a second indication comprises: sending, by the sensing initiating device to the first sensing responding device, the second indication by using at least one of an announcement frame, a trigger frame, a null data packet announcement (NDPA) frame, or a beam refinement protocol (BRP) frame (“this NDPA can also define the order of the AP and include the association identification (AID) information associated with the STAs which are requested to process the following NDP frames. After the STAs in AP1's BSS and the STAs in AP2's BSS receive the NDPA sent by AP1, the STAs will decode the NDPA frame and extract the parameter information for the NDP frame that will follow. After short inter-frame space (SIFS) time of sending the NDPA, the AP1 sends the downlink (DL) NDP, and based on the DL NDP, the STAs in AP1's BSS and the STAs in AP2's BSS can obtain a channel estimation for the downlink channel between the AP1 and the STA” – See [0066]; The second indication is a null data packet announcement (NDPA) frame).
Claims 14 and 20 are rejected based on reasoning similar to Claim 1.
Claim 15 is rejected based on reasoning similar to Claim 2.
Claim 16 is rejected based on reasoning similar to Claim 3.
Claim 18 is rejected based on reasoning similar to Claim 5.
Claim 19 is rejected based on reasoning similar to Claim 6.
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.
Claims 9-12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Doostnejad et al. (US 2020/0213160) in view of Yukawa (US 2023/0224008).
Regarding Claim 9, Doostnejad teaches the method of Claim 8. Doostnejad does not explicitly teach that a common information field or a dedicated information field in the trigger frame indicates performing a truncation and feedback on the time domain channel estimation and sensing sequence.
However, Yukawa teaches that a common information field or a dedicated information field in the trigger frame indicates performing a truncation and feedback on the time domain channel estimation and sensing sequence (“Trigger Type 509 in a Common Info 505 field specifies the type of a trigger handled by this trigger frame” – See [0043]; “Table 1 illustrates associations between Trigger Type subfield values and the types of triggers in Trigger Type 509” – See [0044]; See also Table 1; The common info field includes a trigger type field that indicates a trigger to perform the CSI reporting).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Doostnejad such that a common information field or a dedicated information field in the trigger frame indicates performing a truncation and feedback on the time domain channel estimation and sensing sequence. Motivation for doing so would be to enable the sensing initiating device to provide the sensing responding device with different instructions based on the value carried in the common information field (See Yukawa, [0045] and Table 1).
Regarding Claim 10, Doostnejad in view of Yukawa teaches the method of Claim 9. Yukawa further teaches that a trigger type field comprised in the common information field in the trigger frame indicates performing the truncation and feedback on the time domain channel estimation and sensing sequence (“Trigger Type 509 in a Common Info 505 field specifies the type of a trigger handled by this trigger frame” – See [0043]; “Table 1 illustrates associations between Trigger Type subfield values and the types of triggers in Trigger Type 509” – See [0044]; See also Table 1; The common info field includes a trigger type field that indicates a trigger to perform the CSI reporting).
Regarding Claim 11, Doostnejad teaches the method of Claim 8. Doostnejad does not explicitly teach that a sounding dialog token field or a dedicated information field in the NDPA frame indicates performing a truncation and feedback on the time domain channel estimation and sensing sequence.
However, Yukawa teaches that a sounding dialog token field or a dedicated information field in the NDPA frame indicates performing a truncation and feedback on the time domain channel estimation and sensing sequence (“In the AID 306 field, identification information assigned when a connection between an AP and an STA is established is included … An STA that has received an NDPA frame transmits CSI to the target AP when an AID of its own device and a BSSID of a network in which its own device participates match an AID 306 field and a BSSID 307 field that are included in one of STA Info fields” – See [0040]; See also Fig. 3; The NDPA frame includes STA Info field which is a dedicated field indicating the AID of the device that is requested to perform CSI reporting).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Doostnejad such that a sounding dialog token field or a dedicated information field in the NDPA frame indicates performing a truncation and feedback on the time domain channel estimation and sensing sequence. Motivation for doing so would be to enable the sensing responding device to determine whether the indication to perform a truncation and feedback on the time domain channel estimation and sensing sequence applies to itself based on a match between the identifier in the dedicated information field and its own identifier (See Yukawa, [0040]).
Regarding Claim 12, Doostnejad in view of Yukawa teaches the method of Claim 11. Yukawa further teaches that an association identifier AID field comprised in the dedicated information field in the NDPA frame indicates performing the truncation and feedback on the time domain channel estimation and sensing sequence (“In the AID 306 field, identification information assigned when a connection between an AP and an STA is established is included … An STA that has received an NDPA frame transmits CSI to the target AP when an AID of its own device and a BSSID of a network in which its own device participates match an AID 306 field and a BSSID 307 field that are included in one of STA Info fields” – See [0040]; See also Fig. 3; The NDPA frame includes STA Info field which is a dedicated field that further includes an AID field indicating the AID of the device that is requested to perform CSI reporting).
Claim 13 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Doostnejad et al. (US 2020/0213160) in view of Oteri et al. (US 2021/0143887).
Regarding Claim 13, Doostnejad teaches the method of Claim 8. Doostnejad does not explicitly teach that a BRP request field or a directional multi-gigabit DMG beam adjustment element field in the BRP frame indicates performing a truncation and feedback on the truncated time domain channel estimation and sensing sequence.
However, Oteri teaches that a BRP request field or a directional multi-gigabit DMG beam adjustment element field in the BRP frame indicates performing a truncation and feedback on the truncated time domain channel estimation and sensing sequence (“According to an implementation, the BRP frame structure may be used for hybrid beamforming sounding in an OFDM system. A BRP procedure may be a request response based procedure and the OFDM feedback request/response may be implemented using BRP frame exchanges. A BRP frame may need to be modified to request and carry feedback information for an OFDM system. An example of a BRP frame is shown table 2 below. Fields that may be provided and/or updated may be a BRP Request field and/or EDMG BRP request element, a DMG Beam Refinement element, and Channel Measurement Feedback elements or EDMG Channel Measurement Feedback elements” – See [0167]; A DMG beam refinement element field or BRP request field in a BRP frame indicate that the device is requested to provide the feedback information).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Doostnejad such that a BRP request field or a directional multi-gigabit DMG beam adjustment element field in the BRP frame indicates performing a truncation and feedback on the truncated time domain channel estimation and sensing sequence. Motivation for doing so would be to enable the sensing initiating device to indicate, to the sensing responding device, what kind of feedback is requested (See Oteri, [0168]).
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments filed March 19, 2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
On pages 8-9 of the remarks, Applicant argues in substance that Doostnejad does not teach “a truncated time domain channel estimation,” as recited in independent claims 1, 14, and 20.
The Examiner respectfully disagrees. In response to Applicant’s argument that the Doostnejad reference fails to show certain features of the invention, it is noted that the features upon which applicant relies (i.e., “removing a portion in time domain regardless of the value of the signal in the segment”) 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).
According to the broadest reasonable interpretation, “truncation” may include any type of shortening, abridging, abbreviation, and so on. As shown above in the rejection of claim 1 under 35 U.S.C. 102, Doostnejad teaches that the time domain channel impulse feedback is compressed/truncated by dropping specific samples and selecting the remaining samples to be sent as feedback (See Doostnejad, [0122] and [0128]). Thus, the channel impulse feedback that is actually sent has been shortened/truncated.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 4 and 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
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 Scott M Sciacca whose telephone number is (571)270-1919. The examiner can normally be reached Monday thru Friday, 7:30 A.M. - 5:00 P.M. EST.
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, Joseph Avellino can be reached at (571) 272-3905. 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.
/SCOTT M SCIACCA/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2478
Prosecution Insights