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 with respect to claim(s) 23 and 24 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.
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.
Claim(s) 23 and 24 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Seok (US 2016/0113034) in view of Huang et al. (US 2016/0164652) (“Huang”).
For claims 23 and 24; Seok discloses: wireless LAN access point (which is hereinafter referred to as an "AP"), which connects with a plurality of wireless LAN stations (each of which is hereinafter referred to as an "STA") and receives in a multiple access scheme wireless frames simultaneously transmitted from each of the plurality of STAs (figure 22), said wireless LAN access point comprising: a station information collection unit that collects from the plurality of STAs station information which is used for control of the simultaneous transmission (paragraph 232, 255, 270-273: the UL MU Poll Response frame may include identification information (e.g., a MAC address or an AID) of the transmitting STA (i.e., an STA to participate in the UL MU PPDU transmission), information about a buffer status, and information about resources to be used …Primary AC information included in the UL MU Poll Response frames may also be set to a value indicating AC_VO); a trigger transmission unit that transmits to each of the STAs performing the simultaneous transmission a trigger frame which includes wireless communication resource information available for each STA (paragraph 253, 265, 270-273: The fourth-type trigger frame may correspond to a UL MU Poll Request frame requesting random access of any STA…frame triggering UL MU random access (e.g., a UL MU Poll Request frame) may include primary AC information (or a primary AC field) as response condition information. Accordingly, STAs having traffic corresponding to an AC indicated by the primary AC information included in the frame triggering UL MU random access (e.g., the UL MU Poll Request frame)), and a NAV setting unit that transmits a request-to-send (RTS) frame to the plurality of STAs (paragraph 270-273: Upon receipt of the UL MU Poll Response frames from the plurality of STAs, the AP may request or indicate UL MU transmission to STA1, STA2, STA3, and STA4 by a UL MU Poll Confirm frame) and causes the plurality of STAs to provide a response to the RTS frame simultaneously using a multiple access scheme (paragraph 270-273: If the UL MU Poll Confirm frame is a first type (e.g., MU RTS), STA1, STA2, STA3, and STA4 may configure and transmit CTS frames (e.g., CTS-to-Self frames) in a legacy PPDU format before starting to transmit a UL MU PPDU. In this manner, the plurality of STAs may transmit a UL MU PPDU including traffic corresponding to AC_VO an SIFS after transmitting the MU CTS frames simultaneously).
Seok does not expressly disclose, but Huang from similar fields of endeavor teaches: wherein the AP is configured to set a Network Allocation Vector (NAV) by the trigger frame or the RTS frame, and the NAV is set based on the station information so as to prevent other STAs which does not perform the simultaneous transmission from performing transmission, until the completion of the simultaneous transmission. (paragraph 46: MU-RTS 800 with legacy MAC frame with a NAV field used to defer STAs not participating in the downlink OFDMA and/or MU-MIMO… The initiator may be the AP). Thus it would have been obvious to the person of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to implement the signaling as described by Huang in the UL MU-MIMO as described by Seok. The motivation is to improve coordination of MU-MIMO.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Nabetani et al. (US 2017/0171886); Nabetani discloses determine parameter information on a backoff time of carrier sensing performed according to CSMA/CA (carrier sense multiple access/collision avoidance) on basis of a number of other wireless communication devices establishing connections with the wireless communication device; and a transmitter configured to transmit a first frame which instructs to transmit a response frame according to the parameter information.
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 JOHN D BLANTON whose telephone number is (571)270-3933. The examiner can normally be reached 7am-6pm EST, Mon-Thu.
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, Faruk Hamza can be reached at 571-272-7969. 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.
/JOHN D BLANTON/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2466