DETAILED ACTION
This office action response the amendment application on 5/18/2026.
Claims 1, 3-10, 12-18, 21, and 23 are presented for examination.
Notice of 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 Amendment
This is in response to the amendments filed on May 18, 2026. Claims 1, 10, and 21 have been amended. Claims 2, 11, 19-20, and 22 have been withdrawn from consideration. Claims 1, 3-10, 12-18, 21, and 23 are pending and have been considered below.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments filed May 18, 2026, have been fully considered but are not persuasive.
The Applicant argues (see pages 6–7 of the Remarks) that HWANG et al. (U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2022/0287121 A1) fails to teach or suggest the limitation:
“the information comprises a first identification and/or a second identification; wherein the first identification is configured to identify an addition of a new link, wherein the second identification is configured to identify a deletion of an existing link”, as recited in independent claims 1, 10, and 21.
The Examiner respectfully disagrees.
At the outset, claim terms are given their broadest reasonable interpretation (BRI) consistent with the Specification as understood by one of ordinary skill in the art. See In re Morris, 127 F.3d 1048, 1054 (Fed. Cir. 1997) and In re Am. Acad. of Sci. Tech Ctr., 367 F.3d 1359, 1364 (Fed. Cir. 2004). Under the BRI standard, the recited “first identification and/or second identification” reasonably encompasses information identifying either an addition of a new link, a deletion of an existing link, or both.
The Examiner notes that the claim expressly recites the conjunctive phrase “and/or.” Therefore, the limitation is satisfied when the disclosed information includes either the first identification, the second identification, or both. The rejection relies on this broad but reasonable interpretation of the claim language. As stated in SuperGuide Corp. v. DirecTV Enters., Inc., 358 F.3d 870, 886 (Fed. Cir. 2004), the phrase “and/or” encompasses alternatives including either element individually or both elements collectively. Accordingly, the claim does not require simultaneous disclosure of both identifications.
HWANG teaches information comprising identification values associated with links. Specifically, paragraph [0140] discloses that Association Identifiers (AIDs) may be individually assigned and maintained for respective links. These AIDs constitute identifiers associated with link management and therefore reasonably correspond to the claimed identification information under the broadest reasonable interpretation.
Furthermore, HWANG teaches identification information associated with the addition of a new link. Paragraph [0140] discloses parameters, including an AID, to be used in a new primary link, thereby identifying and supporting the establishment or addition of that new link. Additionally, paragraphs [0119] and [0155] disclose that an AP MLD may transmit a frame including a new AID value mapped to a MAC address after a designated change time. Such disclosure evidences transmission of identification information corresponding to a newly established link configuration.
HWANG also teaches identification information associated with deletion of an existing link. Paragraph [0150] expressly discloses deleting the AID used by the STA or STA MLD on the previous primary link. Similarly, paragraphs [0154]–[0155] disclose deleting AID information associated with the previous primary link following a link transition. A person of ordinary skill in the art would readily understand that removal of the AID associated with the prior link identifies the deletion or discontinuation of that existing link.
Applicant appears to argue that HWANG does not explicitly state, ipsissimis verbis that the identification is “configured to identify” addition and deletion of links. However, the test for anticipation or obviousness is not whether the reference uses identical wording, but whether the reference reasonably teaches or suggests the claimed subject matter. See In re Keller, 642 F.2d 413, 425 (CCPA 1981) (“The test for obviousness is what the combined teachings of the references would have suggested to those of ordinary skill in the art.”). Likewise, a reference need not disclose the claim language verbatim to satisfy a limitation. See In re Gleave, 560 F.3d 1331, 1334 (Fed. Cir. 2009).
Moreover, when the teachings of a reference would reasonably convey the claimed functionality to one of ordinary skill in the art, the limitation is met even if described using different terminology. See In re Preda, 401 F.2d 825, 826 (CCPA 1968), which instructs that a reference must be evaluated for everything it reasonably teaches and suggests to a skilled artisan.
Accordingly, paragraphs [0140], [0150], [0154], and [0155] of HWANG collectively disclose identification information associated with both the addition of a new link and the deletion of an existing link. Under the broadest reasonable interpretation of the claims, and in view of the understanding of one of ordinary skill in the art, HWANG teaches or at least suggests the disputed limitation.
Therefore, the Examiner maintains that HWANG et al. meets the scope of the claimed limitation recited in claims 1, 10, and 21, and the Applicant’s arguments are not persuasive.
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.
(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, 3-7, 9-10, 12-16, 18, 21, and 23 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by HWANG et al. (U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 20220287121 A1), (“D1”, hereinafter).
As per Claim 1, D1 discloses a method for communication on multiple links ([see, [0029], multi-link operation performs communication]), performed by an access point (AP) supporting multi-link communication ([see, [0029], an AP MLD capable of multi-link operation]), the method comprising:
determining a first message frame ([see, [0029, 0150-0155], and Fig. 5, a transmit a frame by using multiple links, and determine the frame notifying that the primary link has been changed on the changed primary link after the appliance time of the designated link]), wherein the first message frame ([see, Fig. 4, management frame) comprises information related to adding and/or deleting at least one link ([see, [0150-0155], and Fig. 5, AP MLD may register AID information of the corresponding STA in the changed primary link, and the AP MLD may delete the AID information used in the previous primary link]); and
transmitting the first message frame ([see, [0119, 0155], the AP MLD may transmit a frame including a new AID value mapped to a MAC address of the STA MLD after the indicated changing time]); and
wherein the information comprises a first identification and/or a second identification ([see, [0140], association IDs (AIDs) may be individually provided for each link]), wherein the first identification is configured to identify an addition of a new link, wherein the second identification is configured to identify a deletion of an existing link ([see, [0140], the parameters including an AID to be used in a new primary link (a new link) including an AID may be updated to new parameters when they are different from those of the previous primary link (a deletion of an existing link)]).
As per Claim 3, D1 discloses the method according to claim 1, and D1 further discloses wherein the information further comprises a third identification and/or a fourth identification ([see, [0150], AP MLD may allocate the deleted AID to another STA]), wherein the third identification is configured to identify a number of one or more added links, wherein the fourth identification is configured to identify a number of one or more deleted links ([see, [0150], AP MLD may allocate the deleted AID to another STA]).
As per Claim 4, D1 discloses the method according to claim 1, and D1 further discloses wherein the first identification and the third identification are comprised in a same field ([see, [0158], the AP MLD may transmit the trigger frame by including the AID used in the previous primary link in an AID subfield of the trigger frame]).
As per Claim 5, D1 discloses the method according to claim 1, and D1 further discloses wherein the information ([see, [0011], frame including information]) comprises a link information field ([see, [0137], information on each link may include a link ID allocated by the AP MLD for the link]) and the link information field is configured to identify information of an added and/or deleted link ([see, [0154], wherein association IDs (AIDs) information of the corresponding STA in the changed primary link, the AP MLD may delete the AID information used in the previous primary link]).
As per Claim 6, D1 discloses the method according to claim 5, and D1 further discloses wherein in a case that there is an added link, the link information field comprises information about performing an information transmission on the added link ([see, [0171], Information on a link to be added may be further included in the corresponding frame]).
As per Claim 7, D1 discloses the method according to claim 1, and D1 further discloses wherein the information comprises a multi- link device (MLD) media access control (MAC) address presence identification, wherein the MLD MAC address presence identification is configured to indicate a presence of an MLD MAC address in the information ([see, [0155], the AP MLD may transmit a frame including a new AID value mapped to a MAC address of the STA MLD after the indicated changing time]).
As per Claim 9, D1 discloses the method according to claim 1, and D1 further discloses wherein the information is in a form of a multi-link information element, wherein the multi-link information element comprises a type identification for identifying reconfiguring the multi-link information element ([see, [0048], and Fig. 16, a multi-link information element used in a negotiation procedure for performing a multi-link operation between a STA MLD and an AP MLD when performing the multi-link operation]).
As per Claim 10, D1 discloses a method for communication on multiple links ([see, [0029], multi-link operation performs communication]), performed by a station supporting multi-link communication ([see, [0029], an AP MLD capable of multi-link operation with a STA MLD]), the method comprising:
receiving a first message frame ([see, [0029, 0150-0155], and Fig. 5, a transmit a frame by using multiple links, and determine the frame notifying that the primary link has been changed on the changed primary link after the appliance time of the designated link]), wherein the first message frame comprises information related to adding and/or deleting at least one link ([see, [0150-0155], and Fig. 5, AP MLD may register AID information of the corresponding STA in the changed primary link, and the AP MLD may delete the AID information used in the previous primary link]); and
performing a communication operation according to the first message frame ([see, [0155], the AP MLD may transmit a frame including a new AID value mapped to a MAC address of the STA MLD after the indicated changing time]),
wherein the information comprises a first identification and/or a second identification ([see, [0140], association IDs (AIDs) may be individually provided for each link]), wherein the first identification is configured to identify an addition of a new link, wherein the second identification is configured to identify a deletion of an existing link ([see, [0140], the parameters including an AID to be used in a new primary link (a new link) including an AID may be updated to new parameters when they are different from those of the previous primary link (a deletion of an existing link)]).
As per Claim 12, D1 discloses the method according to claim 10, D1 further discloses wherein the information further comprises a third identification and/or a fourth identification ([see, [0150], AP MLD may allocate the deleted AID to another STA]), wherein the third identification is configured to identify a number of one or more added links, wherein the fourth identification is configured to identify a number of one or more deleted links ([see, [0150], AP MLD may allocate the deleted AID to another STA]).
As per Claim 13, D1 discloses the method according to claim 10, D1 further discloses wherein the first identification and the third identification are comprised in a same field ([see, [0158], the AP MLD may transmit the trigger frame by including the AID used in the previous primary link in an AID subfield of the trigger frame]).
As per Claim 14, D1 discloses the method according to claim 10, D1 further discloses wherein the information ([see, [0011], frame including information]) comprises a link information field ([see, [0137], information on each link may include a link ID allocated by the AP MLD for the link]) and the link information field is configured to identify information of an added and/or deleted link ([see, [0154], wherein association IDs (AIDs) information of the corresponding STA in the changed primary link, the AP MLD may delete the AID information used in the previous primary link]).
As per Claim 15, D1 discloses the method according to claim 14, D1 further discloses wherein in a case that there is an added link, the link information field comprises information about performing an information transmission on the added link ([see, [0171], Information on a link to be added may be further included in the corresponding frame]).
As per Claim 16, D1 discloses the method according to claim 10, D1 further discloses wherein the information comprises a multi- link device (MLD) media access control (MAC) address presence identification, wherein the MLD MAC address presence identification is configured to indicate a presence of an MLD MAC address in the information ([see, [0155], the AP MLD may transmit a frame including a new AID value mapped to a MAC address of the STA MLD after the indicated changing time]).
As per Claim 18, D1 discloses the method according to claim 10, and D1 further discloses wherein the information is in a form of a multi-link information element, wherein the multi-link information element comprises a type identification for identifying reconfiguring the multi-link information element ([see, [0048], and Fig. 16, a multi-link information element used in a negotiation procedure for performing a multi-link operation between a STA MLD and an AP MLD when performing the multi-link operation]).
As per Claim 21, D1 discloses an electronic device ([see, [0029], an AP MLD capable of multi-link operation]), comprising:
a memory for storing a computer program ([see, Fig. 2, item 220]); and
a processor ([see, Fig. 2, item 210]),
wherein the processor is configured to:
determine a first message frame ([see, [0029, 0150-0155], and Fig. 5, a transmit a frame by using multiple links, and determine the frame notifying that the primary link has been changed on the changed primary link after the appliance time of the designated link]), wherein the first message frame comprises information related to adding and/or deleting at least one link ([see, [0150-0155], and Fig. 5, AP MLD may register AID information of the corresponding STA in the changed primary link, and the AP MLD may delete the AID information used in the previous primary link]); and
transmit the first message frame ([see, [0155], the AP MLD may transmit a frame including a new AID value mapped to a MAC address of the STA MLD after the indicated changing time]),
wherein the information comprises a first identification and/or a second identification ([see, [0140], association IDs (AIDs) may be individually provided for each link]), wherein the first identification is configured to identify an addition of a new link, wherein the second identification is configured to identify a deletion of an existing link ([see, [0140], the parameters including an AID to be used in a new primary link (a new link) including an AID may be updated to new parameters when they are different from those of the previous primary link (a deletion of an existing link)]).
As per Claim 23, is the system claim corresponding to the method claim 10 that has been rejected above. Applicant attention is directed to the rejection of claim 10. Claim 23 is rejected under the same rational as claim 10.
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 of this title, 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 8 and 17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over HWANG et al. (U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 20220287121 A1), (“D1”, hereinafter), in view of JULIEN et al. (International Application GB 2605981 A), (“D2”, hereinafter).
As per Claims 8, 17, D1 doesn’t appear explicitly disclose: wherein, in a case that there is an added link, the MLD MAC address presence identification is set to a first value to indicate that the MLD MAC address exists in the information; or in a case that there is a deleted link only, the MLD MAC address presence identification is set to a second value to indicate that the MLD MAC address does not exist in the information.
However, D2 discloses wherein, in a case that there is an added link, the MLD MAC address presence identification is set to a first value to indicate that the MLD MAC address exists in the information; or in a case that there is a deleted link only, the MLD MAC address presence identification is set to a second value to indicate that the MLD MAC address does not exist in the information ([see, pages 15-16, lines 25-40, and 1-15, wherein the frame are used in a conventional way, set to value 0 for MLD MAC address subfield 321 is set to the MAC address of AP MLD 110 and Link Info field 330 contains the set of Per-STA profiles of reported affiliated Aps, and including all the network information elements of the corresponding reported affiliated AP]).
In view of the above, having the system of D1 and then given the well-established teaching of D2, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention was made to modify the system of D1 as taught by D2. The motivation for doing so would have been to provide flexibly configure time domain resources MLO improves data throughput by allowing communications between stations over multiple concurrent and non-contiguous communication links (D2, page 2, lines 35-40]).
Conclusion
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 extension fee 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
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).
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to BERHANU D BELETE whose telephone number is (571)272-3478. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday-Friday 7:30am-5pm, Alt. Friday, and EDT.
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, JEONG, MOO R. can be reached on (571) 272-9617. 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 the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/BERHANU D BELETE/Examiner, Art Unit 2468
/WUTCHUNG CHU/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2418
Prosecution Insights