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 .
DETAILED ACTION
Claim Rejections - 35 USC §102(a)2
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 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) 1-8,11,13-15,17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being clearly anticipated by Huang et al (US 11683694 B2) hereinafter as Huang priority to App US 16543157.
Regarding claim(s) 1,15 and 17, Huang discloses a method for performing a response to an access point (AP)-to-AP trigger by a first AP in a wireless local area network (WLAN) system (See Fig(s). 5, WLAN with APs 502 multi-AP group), the method comprising:
receiving, from a second AP, a first trigger frame including information related to a multi-AP operation (See Fig(s). 5, See ¶ 106-108, the controlling AP 502 (intrepeted as second AP) may transmit, to the APs 502 of the multi-AP group 515 , an AP TF…);
based on the first trigger frame, transmitting a response frame to the first trigger to the second AP (See ¶ 111, the controlling AP 502 may receive capability information from one or more of the APs 502 of the multi-AP group 515.,
wherein a common information field of the first trigger frame includes information indicating the multi-AP operation (See Fig(s). 13, See ¶ 152,156, signaling may be used to define multi-AP action, wherein one or more of the following may be applicable: signaling can be in the category subfield or Action field right after category field) .
Further with respect to claims 15 and 17, Huang discloses APs with transceiver (See Fig(s). 7, block 702, See ¶ 88). Also, claim 17, performs the mirrored method of Claim 15.
Regarding claim(s) 2, Huang discloses information indicating the multi-AP operation is indicated by a trigger type subfield of the common information field (See Fig(s). 13, See ¶ 152,156, signaling may be used to define multi-AP action, wherein one or more of the following may be applicable: signaling can be in the category subfield or Action field right after category field).
Regarding claim(s) 3, Huang discloses the common information field includes information on at least one of a value of a length field (See Fig(s). 13, See ¶ 151),
Regarding claim(s) 4, Huang discloses at least one of a user information field or a special user information field of the first trigger frame includes identification information of the first AP (See ¶ 151, one bit may indicate support of being a controlling AP 1212 that can coordinate other APs ) or includes an association identifier (AID) field configured as a value indicating a random access.
Regarding claim(s) 5, Huang discloses at least one of a user information field or a special user information field of the first trigger frame includes at least one of information on a forward error correction (FEC) coding type, a modulation and coding scheme (MCS), a bandwidth, or spatial reuse, related to a PPDU including the response frame (See ¶ 70, the 26-subcarrier RU and 52-subcarrier RU are used in the 20 MHz, 40 MHz, 80 MHz, 160 MHz and 80+80 MHz OFDMA HE PPDU formats.).
Regarding claim(s) 6, Huang discloses after the first AP receives the first trigger frame, and before a response frame to the first trigger frame is transmitted, a second trigger frame is transmitted to at least one station (STA) associated with the first AP from the first AP (See Fig(s). 8, See ¶ 97-98, the AP 502 (Fig. 5) may send a TF, another device and/or component may perform one or more operations that may be the same as, similar to and/or reciprocal to one or more operations of the method 800.).
Regarding claim(s) 7, Huang discloses after the second trigger frame is transmitted, and before the response frame to the first trigger frame is transmitted, a response frame to the second trigger frame is transmitted from the at least one STA (See Fig(s). 16, See ¶ 165, the STA 1616 may send request and receive response on behalf of other APs 1614 in the same physical device 1610).
Regarding claim(s) 8, Huang discloses the response frame includes at least one of whether the first AP participates in the multi- AP operation (See Fig(s). 5, See ¶ 96, o establish the multi-AP group 515, the controlling AP 502 may: transmit one or more messages to advertise the multi-AP group 515; exchange signaling with one or more of the other APs 502) , capability information of the first AP or information included in an operation element of the first AP.
Regarding claim(s) 11, Huang discloses a PPDU including the response frame is configured with uplink multi user (MU) orthogonal frequency division multiple access (OFDMA) PPDU formats (See ¶ 70, the 242-subcarrier RU is used in the 40 MHz, 80 MHz, 160 MHz and 80+80 MHz OFDMA and MU-MIMO HE PPDU formats. ).
Regarding claim(s) 13, Huang discloses a PPDU including the response frame is transmitted on a channel which does not include a primary channel of the second AP (See ¶ 120).
Regarding claim(s) 14, Huang discloses the first AP is a slave AP and the second AP is a master AP (See Fig(s). 122, controlling AP is interpreted as master and subordinate AP as slave).
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 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.
Claim(s) 9 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Huang et al (US 11683694 B2) hereinafter as Huang priority to App US 16543157, in view of Yu et al (US 20230328718 A1) hereinafter as Yu.
Regarding claim(s) 9, Yu discloses wherein a PPDU including the response frame: is configured as an uplink (UL) and a PPDU type and compression mode field is configured as a value of 2 or 3 (See ¶ Table 9, ) PPDU bandwidth 3 Value indicated by an uplink (HE) bandwidth field (2 bits) in a common information field )
Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to incorporate the teachings of Yu within Huang, so as to optimize the bandwidth usage between Aps and Stas.
Claim(s) 10,12 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Huang et al (US 11683694 B2) hereinafter as Huang priority to App US 16543157, in view of Alpert et al (US 20190246423 A1 ) hereinafter as Alpert.
Regarding claim(s) 10, Alpert discloses basic service set (BSS) color field of a PPDU including the response frame is configured as a BSS color value of the first AP (See ¶ 95, a device (AP 102 and/or STA 103) may detect a PPDU and may determine, based on a BSS color field included in a header of the PPDU, whether the PPDU originated from the AP 102 or from one of the associated STAs 103. ).
Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to incorporate the teachings of Alpert within Huang, BSS color is used to indicate the communication between the AP and the associated STAs or other APs of the BSS.
Regarding claim(s) 12, Alpert discloses wherein: a PPDU including the response frame includes information on at least one of a MCS or a signal to noise ratio (SNR) (See ¶ 110). Reasons for combining same as claim 10.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Raj Jain whose telephone number is (571) 272-3145. The examiner can normally be reached on M-Th ~8 ~6.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Derrick Ferris can be reached on 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 an application may be obtained from Patent Center. Status information for published applications may be obtained from Patent Center. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Patent Center for authorized users only. Should you have questions about access to Patent Center, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free).
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) Form at https://www.uspto.gov/patents/uspto-automated- interview-request-air-form.
/RAJ JAIN/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2411