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 .
This Office Action is in response to claim amendment filed on August 11, 2026 and wherein claims 1, 8 and 15 being currently amended.
In virtue of this communication, claims 1-20 are currently pending in this Office Action.
The Office appreciates the explanation of the amendment and analyses of the prior arts, and however, 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) and MPEP 2145.
Response to Arguments
With respect to the non-statutory double patenting rejection of claims as being unpatentable over Application No. 18/495,910, the claims amended, and argument, see remarks filed on August 11,2026, pages 1-2, have been fully considered and the argument is persuasive. Therefore, the double pattern rejection as set forth in the previous Office Action, has been withdrawn
Applicant’s arguments, see Remarks, Pages , filed on , with respect to the rejection(s) of claim(s) 1, under have been fully considered and are persuasive. Therefore, the rejection has been withdrawn. However, upon further consideration, a new ground(s) of rejection is made in view of Ryu.
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 (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 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.
5. Claims 1-2, 8-10, 15-16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Cherian et al. (US 20200106579 A1, hereinafter Cherian) in view of Ryu et al. (US 20220124507 A1, hereinafter Ryu).
Claim 1: Cherian teaches A method (abstract) comprising:
determining sub-channels of a channel for each of a plurality of Access Points (APs) ([0059], “As the TXOP owner, the first AP may coordinate with a second AP (such as a neighboring AP which is not a TXOP owner for this TXOP) to allow both the first AP and the second AP to concurrently access the wireless channel using a coordinated transmission during the TXOP”, [0079], “In a contention-based procedure, the WLAN devices (such as the APs 110, 120, and 130) may determine if the wireless channel is available and may win a contention for an upcoming transmission opportunity (TXOP)… The resource assignment may be a sub-channel or frequency division resource unit (similar to OFDMA) from the wireless channel during a time for the coordinated transmission”, wherein resource assignment is for a sub-channel or frequency division resource unit, Fig. 16, element 1620 Fig.17, element 1710, 1720, [0147],[0150-0151], disclose resource assignment is coordinated and configured to avoid interference between multiple APs);
assigning the sub-channels to the plurality of APs ([0079], “Coordinated transactions refers to a technique in which multiple WLAN devices may concurrently transmit using sub-bands (or resource assignments) during a portion of the TXOP. The TXOP owner (such as the first AP 110) may allocate a resource assignment to another AP (such as the second AP 120). The resource assignment may be a sub-channel or frequency division resource unit (similar to OFDMA) from the wireless channel during a time for the coordinated transmission”, Fig. 14, element 1420, Fig.15, element 1540, 1550, [0143], “allocating resources to the one or more second APs …the allocated resources for each of the one or more second APs being available for use by the respective second AP”, [0147], “The resource assignment may be conditionally available for use by the second WLAN subject to a condition based, at least in part, on an amount of interference that its use would cause to the first WLAN”. Fig. 10B, [0107], “The MAP-CT-Trigger 920 may provide scheduling information for coordinated OFDMA, which may include sub-channel assignment for each of the participating APs 110, 120, and 130 for use in transmitting the uplink coordinated transmissions”, [0120], “example of a multi-AP physical protocol data unit 1050 … the MAP PPDU 1050 may have a new field defined (such as HE-SIG-C) to the preamble to carry the mapping of AP identifier to the subchannel …Spatial Reuse fields of the HE-SIG-A may be used for carrying the AP identifier and subchannel mapping …SR bits in the HE-SIG-A field 1070 may be used to provide coordinated transmission information…sub-channels available for re-use”);
and scheduling Transmit Opportunities (TxOps) for the plurality of APs on the sub- channels (Fig. 3, Fig.4, Fig.5, [0079], “the APs may be configured to support coordinated transmissions on a wireless channel. Coordinated transactions refers to a technique in which multiple WLAN devices may concurrently transmit using sub-bands (or resource assignments) during a portion of the TXOP … The resource assignment may be a sub-channel or frequency division resource unit (similar to OFDMA) from the wireless channel during a time for the coordinated transmission”. Fig. 14, element 1420, 1430, 1440, [0136-0138], disclose the flow of scheduling transmission opportunity between first and second AP, Fig. 15, element 1540, 1550, 1560, [0144], “transmitting a multi-AP coordinated transmission trigger (MAP-CT-Trigger) message to the plurality of APs to indicate the allocated resources and a start of the second portion of the transmission opportunity”).
However, Cherian does not explicitly teach determining a basic Physical Layer Protocol Data Unit (PPDU) and an enhanced PPDU will be simultaneously transmitted on adjacent sub-channels, wherein the enhanced PPDU comprises pre-modulated fields and modulated fields, and wherein at least one modulated field of the enhanced PPDU differs from the basic PPDU in at least one of OFDM symbol duration or subcarrier spacing.
in response to determining the basic PPDU and the enhanced PPDU will be simultaneously transmitted on adjacent sub-channels: for one or more sub-channels of the enhanced PPDU, selecting one or more Resource Units (RUs) to disable transmission on which transmission is disabled during transmission of the modulated fields of the enhanced PPDU.
Ryu, from the same or similar field of endeavor, teaches determining a basic Physical Layer Protocol Data Unit PPDU and an enhanced PPDU (Ryu, [0214], “Preamble puncturing may be signaled from a Bandwidth field in the HE-SIG-A field of an HE MU PPDU”, wherein PPDU with supporting preamble puncturing is reading as enhanced PPDU, PPDU without supporting preamble puncturing is reading as basic PPDU. [0215-0219], disclose preamble puncturing is performed corresponding to Bandwidth field setting value) will be simultaneously transmitted (Ryu, abstract, [0283], The first AP transmits a first C-OFDMA PPDU to a first STA through a first channel. the second AP transmit a second C-OFDMA PPDU simultaneously together with the first PPDU through a second channel) on adjacent sub-channels (Ryu, abstract, [0287], The first channel corresponds to a channel remaining after excluding a preamble-punctured channel from the entire channel, and the second channel corresponds to the preamble-punctured channel) , wherein the enhanced PPDU comprises pre-modulated fields and modulated fields ([0213], “In the HE-STF, HE-LTF, and Data fields, which are transmitted in an HE format, preamble puncturing is performed by allocating a free subchannel to the user. The L-STF, L-LTF, L-SIG, RL-SIG, and HE-SIG-B preamble fields are transmitted in a legacy mode”, wherein L-STF, L-LTF, L-SIG, RL-SIG, and HE-SIG-B are reading as pre-modulated fields, E-STF, HE-LTF, and Data fields are reading as modulated fields), and wherein at least one modulated field of the enhanced PPDU differs from the basic PPDU in at least one of OFDM symbol duration (Ryu , [0292], “The C-OFDMA request frame may further include second information on a transmission opportunity TXOP duration for the first and second C-OFDMA PPDUs, third information on a length of the first and second C-OFDMA PPDUs, and fourth information on a target AP address of an AP participating in first and second C-OFDMA PPDU transmission”, wherein the first and second PPDU durations are configurable) or subcarrier spacing (alternative).
in response to determining the basic PPDU and the enhanced PPDU will be simultaneously transmitted on adjacent sub-channels: for one or more sub-channels of the enhanced PPDU, selecting one or more Resource Units RUs to disable transmission on which transmission is disabled during transmission of the modulated fields of the enhanced PPDU ([0297-0298], the first information and the response information may be bitmap information being configured of bits for each of the at least one RU, an RU through which the first C-OFDMA PPDU is to be transmitted and an RU through which the second C-OFDMA PPDU is to be transmitted may be determined based on preamble-punctured, the first information and the response information. [0213], “In the HE-STF, HE-LTF, and Data fields, which are transmitted in an HE format, preamble puncturing is performed by allocating a free subchannel to the user … HE-SIG-B preamble fields are transmitted in a legacy mode and do not transmit a preamble field over a corresponding 20 MHz subchannel by using the technique of preamble puncturing”, [0220-0224], disclose couple of examples of transmitting an MU PPDU, by an AP, by using preamble
puncturing).
Cherian, and Ryu are both considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because they are in the same field of wireless communication. Therefore, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the system of Cherian and the features of selecting RU on which transmission is disable during of the modulated field of the enhanced PPDU, as taught by Ryu, in the benefit of allocating a free subchannel to the user via performing preamble puncturing (paragraph [0213]), by transmitting a C-OFDMA PPDU at the same time by having another AP use a channel that is busy for one AP, based on a preamble puncturing method, interference according to BSS may be prevented, and resource may be efficiently used (para [0016]).
Claim 8 is analyzed and rejected according to Claim 1 and Cherian further teaches a memory storage (Fig. 13A, element 1340); and a processing unit (Fig. 13A, element 1330) coupled to the memory storage ([0131], “the AP 1302 additionally includes an application processor 1330 coupled with the wireless communication device 1310, and a memory 1340 coupled with the application processor 1330”).
Claim 15 is analyzed and rejected according to Claim 1 and Cherian further teaches A non-transitory computer-readable medium that stores a set of instructions which when executed perform a method executed by the set of instructions ([0009], “Another innovative aspect of the subject matter described in this disclosure can be implemented in a tangible computer-readable storage medium that includes non-transitory processor-executable code which, when executed by at least one processor of a wireless device, may cause the wireless device to implement any of the methods in this disclosure”, [0178], “such storage media may include RAM, ROM, EEPROM, CD-ROM or other optical disk storage, magnetic disk storage or other magnetic storage devices, or any other medium that may be used to store program code in the form of instructions or data structures”).
Claim 2: Cherian teaches the method of claim 1, wherein the sub-channels have any one of a width of: (i) twenty Megahertz (MHz), (ii) forty MHz, or (iii) a combination of (i) and (ii) ([0073], “each of which is divided into multiple 20 MHz channels. As such, these PPDUs are transmitted over a physical channel having a minimum bandwidth of 20 MHz, but larger channels can be formed through channel bonding … PPDUs may be transmitted over physical channels having bandwidths of 40 MHz, 80 MHz, 160 or 320 MHz by bonding together multiple 20 MHz channels”, [0090], “ the scheduling indication may be provided in a MAP-PPDU from each of the second AP 120 and third AP 130. The subchannel used by each AP 120 and 130 for transmission of a SI frame may be derived from the MAP-Sch-Trigger 310 … a SI-frame 520 that occupies a first sub-channel of multiple available subchannels (such as a first 20 MHz channel of multiple available 20 MHz channels)”).
Claim 9 is analyzed and rejected according to claim 8 and claim 2.
Claim 16 is analyzed and rejected according to claim 15 and claim 2.
Claim 10: Cherian teaches the system of claim 8, wherein determining the sub-channels comprises: estimating Co-Channel Interference (CCI) (Fig. 2, [0072], “The APs 102 and STAs 104 also can be configured to communicate over other frequency bands such as shared licensed frequency bands, where multiple operators may have a license to operate in the same or overlapping frequency band or bands”, [0078], “the APs 110, 120, and 130 may be configured to use a same wireless channel … they are configured for the same wireless channel in the same location”, wherein the same wireless channel is serving the similar as co-channel. [0060], “the parameter may be related to a power level, channel quality, interference tolerance…The first AP can calculate the parameter and provide it to the second AP. The second AP can use the parameter … to determine whether using the resource assignment would cause too much interference to the first WLAN”, wherein the interference tolerance on the same channel is reading as Co-Channel Interference); and determining the CCI is below a threshold ([0151], “the coordinated transmission is configured for concurrent downlink communication from the first AP to the first STA and from the second AP to the second STA. The condition may be configured to prevent the second AP from using the resource assignment when its use would cause interference to the first STA above the threshold”, [0150], “the coordinated transmission is configured for concurrent uplink communication from the first STA to the first AP and from the second STA to the second AP. The condition may be configured to prevent the second STA from using the resource assignment when its use would cause interference to the first AP above the threshold”, [0016], “The condition may be configured to prevent the second APs from using the respective allocated resources when the transmit power of the respective second AP is above a threshold” ).
6. Claims 4-7, 12-14, 18-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Cherian et al. (US 20200106579 A1, hereinafter Cherian) in view of Ryu et al. (US 20220124507 A1, hereinafter Ryu) and further in view of Lin et al. (US 20250193741 A1, hereinafter Lin).
Claim 4: Cherian does not explicitly teach the method of claim 1, further comprising: for the one or more sub-channels of the enhanced PPDU, selecting one or more additional RUs to assign a new Modulation Coding Scheme (MCS) lower than a first MCS, wherein the first MCS would be selected in an absence of interference from the basic PPDU.
However, Lin, from the same or similar field of endeavor, teaches for the one or more sub-channels of the enhanced PPDU, selecting one or more additional RUs to assign a new Modulation Coding Scheme MCS lower than a first MCS, wherein the first MCS would be selected in an absence of interference from the basic PPDU (Fig. 24A, element 2415, Fig. 24B, element 2455, [0165], “The STA may identify the size and location of the one or more resources that the STA is to measure for the channel condition … the STA may read the preamble of a PPDU and measure a signal strength (e.g., RSRP, RSSI, RSRQ, or the like) or SINR of the PPDU to determine the channel condition. At step 2415, the STA may determine, based on the channel condition, an MCS index and a number of spatial streams for link adaptation”, Fig. 23B, [0163], “the STA2 2354 may determine … one or more RUs, and/or a BW to measure the channel condition/quality. The STA2 2304 may then determine, based on the channel condition/quality, a recommended EHT-MCS and a recommended number of spatial streams (Nss) … the STA2 2354 may indicate that the recommended EHT MCS and the recommended Nss corresponding to the RU/MRU the STA2 2354 measured”, [0131], “Link Adaptation is a mechanism of a transmitter and receiver communicating to establish optimal parameters, such as modulation and coding scheme (MCS), given the channel condition or the radio environment … determine the optimum MCS based on channel conditions and then continuously adjust the selection of MCS as conditions change due to interference, motion, fading”).
Cherian, and Lin are both considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because they are in the same field of wireless communication. Therefore, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the system of Cherian and the features of indicating either basic or enhanced PPDU format in the SI frames, as taught by Lin, for allowing APs coordination, RU(s) selection based on whether STA can receive and provide unsolicited EHT MFB (MCS feedback PPDU) (paragraph [0148], [0101]), thus increasing peak throughput and improve efficiency through Link adaptation method via EHT mode (para [0129-0131]).
Claim 12 is analyzed and rejected according to claim 8 and claim 4.
Claim 18 is analyzed and rejected according to claim 15 and claim 4.
Claim 5: The combination of Cherian and Lin teaches the method of claim 4, Lin additionally teaches wherein the new MCS is calculated based on a distance between the one or more additional RUs and a sub-channel the basic PPDU will be transmitted on ([0131], “Link Adaptation is a mechanism of a transmitter and receiver communicating to establish optimal parameters, such as modulation and coding scheme (MCS), given the channel
condition or the radio environment … determine the optimum MCS based on channel
conditions and then continuously adjust the selection of MCS as conditions change due to interference, motion, fading”, [0165], “The STA may identify the size and location of the one or more resources that the STA is to measure for the channel condition … the STA may read the preamble of a PPDU and measure a signal strength (e.g., RSRP, RSSI, RSRQ, or the like) or SINR of the PPDU to determine the channel condition. At step 2415, the STA may determine, based on the channel condition, an MCS index and a number of spatial streams for link adaptation”, wherein channel quality measurement, such as interference, RSRP , RSRQ, SINR and etc. are associated with a distance between the one or more additional RUs and a sub-channel).
The motivation for combining Cherian and Lin regarding to claim 4 is also applied to claim 5.
Claim 13 is analyzed and rejected according to claim 8 and claim 5.
Claim 19 is analyzed and rejected according to claim 15 and claim 5.
Claim 6: The combination of Cherian and Lin teaches the method of claim 4, Lin further comprising: for the one or more sub-channels of the enhanced PPDU, selecting one or more further RUs to assign a second MCS lower than the first MCS and higher than the new MCS ( [0170], “one or more bits in acknowledgement frame may be used to indicate the suggested or requested increase and/or decrease of MCS or information related to link adaptation. This may be referred to as simplified link adaptation. In an example, in a downlink transmission, an AP may transmit a frame to a STA using MCS n. By detecting the DL transmission successfully or correctly, the STA may suggest the AP to use MCS n+1 (i.e., one level higher) or higher MCS or MCS n−1 (i.e., one level lower) or lower MCS for next transmission in the acknowledgement frame”, [0171], “a non-AP STA may transmit a frame to an AP using MCS n. By detecting the UL transmission successfully, the AP may suggest/request the STA to use MCS n+1 (i.e., one level higher) or MCS n−1 (i.e., one level lower) in the acknowledgement frame. The STA may follow the suggestion or decline the suggestion in the next transmission”, Fig. 23A, element 2310, [0161], “The EHT RU Allocation subfield of the first PPDU 2310 may include one or more RUs that STA2 2304 is to measure for the ELA feedback”, [0162], “the STA2 2304
may measure the channel condition/quality based on the one or more RUs of the EHT RU Allocation subfield”).
The motivation for combining Cherian and Lin regarding to claim 4 is also applied to claim 6.
Claim 14 is analyzed and rejected according to claim 8 and claim 6.
Claim 20 is analyzed and rejected according to claim 15 and claim 6.
Claim 7: The combination of Cherian and Lin teaches the method of claim 6, Lin further teaches wherein the second MCS is calculated based on a distance between the one or more additional RUs and a sub-channel the basic PPDU will be transmitted on ([0131], “Link Adaptation is a mechanism of a transmitter and receiver communicating to establish optimal parameters, such as modulation and coding scheme (MCS), given the channel condition or the radio environment … determine the optimum MCS based on channel conditions and then continuously adjust the selection of MCS as conditions change due to interference, motion, fading”, [0165], “The STA may identify the size and location of the one or more resources that the STA is to measure for the channel
condition … the STA may read the preamble of a PPDU and measure a signal strength (e.g., RSRP, RSSI, RSRQ, or the like) or SINR of the PPDU to determine the channel
condition. At step 2415, the STA may determine, based on the channel condition, an MCS index and a number of spatial streams for link adaptation”, wherein channel quality measurement, such as interference, RSRP , RSRQ, SINR and etc. are associated with a distance between the one or more additional RUs and a sub-channel).
The motivation for combining Cherian and Lin regarding to claim 4 is also applied to claim 7.
7. Claims 3, 11, 17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Cherian et al. (US 20200106579 A1, hereinafter Cherian) in view of Ryu et al. (US 20220124507 A1, hereinafter Ryu) and further in view of Narula et al. (US 20240406745 A1, hereinafter Narula).
Claim 3: Cherian does not explicitly teach the method of claim 1, wherein determining the sub-channels comprises determining positions of the sub-channels to create gaps between the sub-channels.
Narula, from the same or similar field of endeavor, teaches wherein determining the sub-channels comprises determining positions of the sub-channels to create gaps between the sub-channels (Fig. 7, element 720, 730, 740, [0039], “ interference avoidance for high density ad hoc networks may be implemented by creating ad hoc WLAN clusters (WLAN pico-nets) of IHSs with nonoverlapping channels … Physical separation of ad hoc WLAN clusters may be optimized, minimizing cochannel interference, such as through use of dynamic threshold calculations. Nearby ad hoc WLAN clusters may be further isolated by dynamically adjusting transmit power control to isolate nearby ad hoc WLAN clusters, and/or by scaling channel width, such as through Dynamic Throughput Scalar (DTS) calculations”, [0048], “co-channel interference strength is identified … Thereafter, weak co-channel interference signals may be ignored, and co-channel concurrent transmission is implemented, per FIG. 10. This increases system throughput”. Wherein physically separating, ignoring weak co-channel interference, scaling channel width is reading as performing the similar function as determining positions of the sub-channels to create gaps between the sub-channels).
Cherian and Narula are both considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because they are in the same field of wireless communication. Therefore, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the system of Cherian and the features of determining positions of the sub-channels to create gaps between the sub-channels as taught by Narula, for the benefit for minimizing cochannel interference by physical separation , dynamically adjusting transmit power control, dynamically scaling channel width (paragraph [0039]), and increasing system throughput by using dynamic throughput scalar to adjust channel width (Fig. 720, paragraph [0052]).
Claim 11 is analyzed and rejected according to claim 8 and claim 3.
Claim 17 is analyzed and rejected according to claim 15 and claim 3.
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 YONGHONG ZHAO whose telephone number is (571)272-4089. The examiner can normally be reached Monday -Friday 9:00 am - 5:00pm.
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, NICHOLAS JENSEN can be reached on 5712723980. 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.
/Y.Z./Examiner, Art Unit 2472
/NICHOLAS A JENSEN/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2472
Prosecution Insights