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
RESPONSE TO AMENDMENT
Status of Application/Amendments/claims
Applicant’s amendment filed on 7/1/2026 is acknowledged. Claims 9 and 19 are cancelled. Claims 2, 6-8, 10, 14-18 are amended.
Claims 1-8, 10-18 and 20 are pending and have been examined, of which claims 1, 7 and 14 are independent.
Claim Rejections/Objections Withdrawn
In view of the amendment filed, the following rejections/objections are withdrawn.
Claim objections for claim 15 has been withdrawn.
Duplicate claim warning has been withdrawn.
Claim rejection under 35 USC 112(b) for claims 14-20 have been withdrawn.
Claim Rejections/Objections Maintained and
New Grounds of Rejection Necessitated by the Amendment
In view of the amendment filed, the following rejections/objections are maintained for the reasons as described in response to argument section. Further, new grounds of rejections are addressed as necessitated by the amendment filed.
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.
Claim(s) 1-2, 14-15 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Sachs et al. (US 20080192696)
Regarding claim 1, Sachs teaches a station (STA) (user terminal UT 240, fig 2) comprising:
a transceiver (para 95: a user terminal, UT, 240, establishes a radio link connection with AP1, 210, or AP2, 220); and
a processor communicatively coupled to the transceiver (processing means PM 242, fig 2, para 95: a user terminal, UT, 240, to establish a radio link connection with AP1, 210, or AP2, 220, e.g. in form of a communication session with the WLAN 200), configured to:
transmit via the transceiver, when the STA is associated with a first access point (AP) (para 98: a WLAN connectivity between UT 240 and AP1, 210, is established) and is transitioning to a second AP (para 39: assisting a handover of a user terminal's, UT's communication session from a first radio access point, AP1, to a second radio access point, AP2), to the second AP a control signal comprising a first indication for sequence number (SN) maintenance (fig 4-6; para 104-105: in step 4160, the UT 240 starts the (open system) EAP authentication procedure with AP2, 220, and sends a conventional Association Request frame to AP2, 220, as illustrated by step 9 in FIG. 6B, this triggers an abortion of the radio connectivity between UT 240 and AP1, 210, in a conventional manner, this also triggers a packet re-sequencing algorithm at UT 240, as illustrated in FIG. 5; AP2, 220, concludes the association procedure by sending a conventional Association Response message to UT 240, as illustrated by step 12 in FIG. 6B. According to the invention, the IAPP-ADD-Notify packet includes a session identifier uniquely identifying the session in question and may also comprise a sequence number indicating the packet's validity, along with the WLAN MAC address of UT 240 and/or AP2, 220; thus, the association request from UT to AP2 implies the data session and sequence maintenance); and
receive via the transceiver, from the second AP responsive to the first indication for SN maintenance, a first downlink (DL) transmission comprising a next SN (4180, fig 4b; para 106: the LLC/Ethernet frames forwarded by AP1, 210, and AR 250 via M-L2S1, 230 (including new downlink packets), are according to the invention cached in memory 223 at AP2, 220, and transmitted to UT 240 immediately after the EAP authentication procedure is completed), wherein the next SN is a continuation of an SN series utilized by the first AP for one or more previous DL transmissions (fig 5; para 118: in step 5060, it is established whether said next packet is a consecutive packet of the last packet forwarded to the higher protocol layer/final application, referred to as "last forwarded packet" by comparing said FSNNEXT with said FSN (frame sequence number)).
Regarding claim 14, Sachs teaches a second access point (AP) (access point AP1 210, fig 2) comprising:
a transceiver (para 95: AP1, 210, and AP2, 220, have a respective conventional radio transceiver unit); and
a processor communicatively coupled to the transceiver (AP2 comprising processing means PM 222 and establishes radio link with UT, fig 2), configured to:
receive from a station (STA) transitioning to the second AP (para 39: assisting a handover of a user terminal's, UT's communication session from a first radio access point, AP1, to a second radio access point, AP2), a control signal comprising a first indication for sequence number (SN) maintenance (fig 4-6; para 104-105: in step 4160, the UT 240 starts the (open system) EAP authentication procedure with AP2, 220, and sends a conventional Association Request frame to AP2, 220, as illustrated by step 9 in FIG. 6B, this triggers an abortion of the radio connectivity between UT 240 and AP1, 210, in a conventional manner, this also triggers a packet re-sequencing algorithm at UT 240, as illustrated in FIG. 5; AP2, 220, concludes the association procedure by sending a conventional Association Response message to UT 240, as illustrated by step 12 in FIG. 6B. According to the invention, the IAPP-ADD-Notify packet includes a session identifier uniquely identifying the session in question and may also comprise a sequence number indicating the packet's validity, along with the WLAN MAC address of UT 240 and/or AP2, 220; thus, the association request from UT to AP2 implies the data session and sequence maintenance);
receive from a first AP with which the STA is currently associated (para 98: a WLAN connectivity between UT 240 and AP1, 210, is established), a transition response signal comprising an SN of an SN series utilized by the first AP, corresponding to the first indication (para 106: in step 4180, AP2, 220, receives session downlink packets from AR 250 and/or AP1, 210, and buffers them in memory 223. All session downlink IP packets (encapsulated as LLC/Ethernet frames), that are still cached in AP1, 210, and/or not yet transmitted to or acknowledged by UT 240, can be sent directly to AP2, 220, as illustrated by step 14 in FIG. 6B); and
transmit to the STA a first downlink (DL) transmission comprising a next SN (4180, fig 4b; para 106: the LLC/Ethernet frames forwarded by AP1, 210, and AR 250 via M-L2S1, 230 (including new downlink packets), are according to the invention cached in memory 223 at AP2, 220, and transmitted to UT 240 immediately after the EAP authentication procedure is completed), wherein the next SN is a continuation of the SN series utilized by the first AP for one or more previous DL transmissions (fig 5; para 118: in step 5060, it is established whether said next packet is a consecutive packet of the last packet forwarded to the higher protocol layer/final application, referred to as "last forwarded packet" by comparing said FSNNEXT with said FSN (frame sequence number)).
Regarding claim 2, Sachs further teaches a single reorder buffer communicatively coupled to the processor (fig 2, memory buffers 243-245 coupled to PM in UT 240; reorder using first and second buffer memory is described in fig 5, thus considered as single reorder buffer), wherein the single reorder buffer corresponds to a traffic identifier (TID) (para 113: data packets in first and second buffer are associated with FSN and real time application) and the processor is further configured to:
receive via the transceiver, from the first AP, a second DL transmission comprising one or more DL frames initially buffered (DFIB) at the first AP (para 103: AP1, 210, then starts caching (buffering) the downlink IP packets addressed to UT, 240, in memory (213), AP1, 210, continues to transmit downlink packets over its radio link to UT 240, and simultaneously forwards duplicate packets to AP2, 220, allowing a soft handover realization); and
reorder, in the single reorder buffer, one or more packets received from the first DL transmission and the second DL transmission (fig 5 describes a packet re-sequencing algorithm for UT 240).
Regarding claim 15, Sachs further teaches wherein the processor (PM 222, fig 2) is further configured to:
receive from the first AP a first Media Access Control (MAC) service data unit (MSDU) with MetaData (para 106: encapsulated as LLC/Ethernet frames; it is understood that Ethernet operates at MAC layer, thus the frames are MAC frames), wherein the first MSDU comprises one or more DL frames initially buffered (DFIB) at the first AP (para 106: in step 4180, AP2, 220, receives session downlink packets from AR 250 and/or AP1, 210, and buffers them in memory 223. All session downlink IP packets (encapsulated as LLC/Ethernet frames), that are still cached in AP1, 210, and/or not yet transmitted to or acknowledged by UT 240, can be sent directly to AP2, 220, as illustrated by step 14 in FIG. 6B), wherein the MetaData comprises a second SN of the SN series (para 114: a frame sequence number, FSN, is extracted from said first data packet; para 106: all session downlink IP packets (encapsulated as LLC/Ethernet frames), that are still cached in AP1, 210, and/or not yet transmitted to or acknowledged by UT 240, can be sent directly to AP2, 220, as illustrated by step 14 in FIG. 6B);
transmit to the STA, the first MSDU with the second SN (para 106: downlink and uplink IP packets can be sent over the radio link between UT 240 and the AP2, 220, as soon as the EAP authentication procedure is completed; step 15 in FIG. 6B).
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 set forth in Graham v. John Deere Co., 383 U.S. 1, 148 USPQ 459 (1966), that are applied 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.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims, the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claims 6, 16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sachs et al. (US 20080192696) in view of Ho et al. (US 20240107411)
Regarding claim 6, Sachs teaches the limitations of parent claim. Sachs fails to teach MAC data packet from second AP that includes packet forwarded to second AP and packet of second AP. Ho is directed to WLAN make before break handover.
Ho further teaches wherein the first DL transmission comprises a first Media Access Control (MAC) service data unit (MSDU) and a second MSDU, wherein the first MSDU comprises one or more DL frames initially buffered (DFIB) that are forwarded to the second AP, and the second MSDU comprises DL frames initially buffered at the second AP, wherein the first MSDU and the second MSDU correspond to a same TID, and wherein the first MSDU is received before the second MSDU (fig 7, 8; para 76-78: first, downlink (DL) duplication is initiated where AP1 may start to duplicate DL packets, by forwarding the DL packets to AP2, upon receipt, AP2 sends the DL packets to STA2; as shown in fig 7, in step 2 and 3 - the DL packets from AP1 are duplicated and sent to STA and AP2 and AP2 also sends forwarded duplicate DL packets to STA, in step 3 – the MLD context is relocated and in step 4 the DL packets are transmitted from AP2; para 102: the context information for the MLD comprises information regarding at least one of: association context, security context, or TID to link mapping, one or more BA sessions, a downlink packet buffer, an uplink packet re-ordering buffer, a SN, or a PN; para 48: MLDs may utilize multi-link aggregation (MLA) (which includes packet level aggregation), whereby MPDUs from a same traffic ID (TID) may be sent via two or more wireless links). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine WLAN handover of communication session as taught by Sachs with make before break handover in WLAN as taught by Ho for the benefit of maintaining set of associated link for non-AP MLD as taught by Ho in Para 68.
Regarding claim 16, Sachs teaches the limitations of parent claim. Sachs fails to teach MAC data packet from second AP that includes packet forwarded to second AP and packet of second AP. Ho is directed to WLAN make before break handover.
Ho further teaches to transmit a second DL transmission (steps 2, 3, fig 7 showing transmission of duplicate DL transmission from AP2 to STA), wherein the second DL transmission comprises a first Media Access Control (MAC) service data unit (MSDU) and a second MSDU, wherein the first MSDU comprises one or more DL frames initially buffered (DFIB) at the first AP, and the second MSDU comprises DL frames initially buffered at the second AP, wherein the first MSDU and the second MSDU correspond to a same TID, and wherein the first MSDU is received before the second MSDU (fig 7, 8; para 76-78: first, downlink (DL) duplication is initiated where AP1 may start to duplicate DL packets, by forwarding the DL packets to AP2, upon receipt, AP2 sends the DL packets to STA2; as shown in fig 7, in step 2 and 3 - the DL packets from AP1 are duplicated and sent to STA and AP2 and AP2 also sends forwarded duplicate DL packets to STA, in step 3 – the MLD context is relocated and in step 4 the DL packets are transmitted from AP2; para 102: the context information for the MLD comprises information regarding at least one of: association context, security context, or TID to link mapping, one or more BA sessions, a downlink packet buffer, an uplink packet re-ordering buffer, a SN, or a PN; para 48: MLDs may utilize multi-link aggregation (MLA) (which includes packet level aggregation), whereby MPDUs from a same traffic ID (TID) may be sent via two or more wireless links). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine WLAN handover of communication session as taught by Sachs with make before break handover in WLAN as taught by Ho for the benefit of maintaining set of associated link for non-AP MLD as taught by Ho in Para 68.
Claims 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sachs et al. (US 20080192696) in view of Sharma et al. (US 20190357289)
Regarding claim 20, Sachs fails to teach, but Sharma further teaches wherein the control signal further comprises a second indication for the second AP to utilize a same quality of service (QoS) mapping rule applied between the first AP and the STA (para 59: the WT node (WLAN AP 106a) may be configured to receive, at step 512, the “WLAN AP ADDITION REQUEST” message comprising the list of DRB IDs (i.e. E-RABs) and the associated LTE QoS parameters like QCI and ARP. The WT node (WLAN AP 106a or WLAN 108) may be configured to translate or map, at step 514, the received LTE QoS parameters to the WLAN QoS parameters using a mapping table), and wherein the processor (processor 1402, fig 14) is further configured to:
receive, from the first AP, the same QoS mapping rule (fig 5; para 58-59: the LTE node 102 transmits at step 512 to WLAN AP 106, the “WLAN AP ADDITION REQUEST” message comprising the list of DRB IDs (i.e. E-RABs) and the associated LTE QoS parameters like QCI and ARP); and
transmit a second DL transmission according to the same QoS mapping rule (para 68-69: the RRC message, at step 616, sent to the UE 104a may also include the WLAN QoS parameters associated with the offloaded DRB if the DRB is a UL DRB, mapping or translating of LTE QoS parameters to WLAN QoS parameters for an offloaded DRB to maintain QoS associated with the DRB if data packets are scheduled through the WLAN RAT). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine WLAN handover of communication session as taught by Sachs with QoS mapping during offloading of the DRBs to WLAN as taught by Sharma for the benefit of having seamless aggregation between LTE and WLAN radio resources for a particular UE as taught by Sharma in Para 49.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 7-8, 10-13 are allowed.
Claims 3-5, 17-18 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.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed with respect to Sachs not teaching the limitation “receive via the transceiver, from the second AP responsive to the first indication for SN maintenance, a first downlink (DL) transmission comprising a next SN, wherein the next SN is a continuation of an SN series utilized by the first AP for one or more previous DL transmissions” of claim 1 (and similarly for claim 14, pages 8-10) have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
The applicant argues that Sachs provides a packet re-sequencing algorithm for UT that can be triggered by an authentication or handover decision, and since the re-sequencing occurs at the UT, Sachs has no need for SN maintenance between APs. The examiner respectfully disagrees.
The claim recites the STA to transmit a SN maintenance indication to the second AP and receive DL with next SN based on SN maintenance, where the next SN is continuation of SN series utilized by first AP.
Sachs teaches in step 4160 of fig 4B, para 104-105 and fig 6B, the UT 240 starts the (open system) EAP authentication procedure with AP2, 220, and sends a conventional Association Request frame to AP2, 220. AP2, 220, concludes the association procedure by sending a conventional Association Response message to UT 240, as illustrated by step 12 in FIG. 6B. The notify packet for request includes sequence number, thus considered as a message sent from STA to AP2 for sequence maintenance. Further, 4180, fig 4B and para 106 describe that AP2 memory caches frames forwarded by AP1, and AP2 transmits cached packets to UT upon completion of authentication. In fig 5, 5060, the UT can establish that the next packet is consecutive packet with frame sequence number. Thus, following the handover from AP1 to AP2, the frame sequence number are maintained. Thus, the prior art appears to teach the argued limitation.
Applicant’s arguments (pages 10-13), with respect to the rejection(s) of claim 7 have been fully considered and are persuasive. Therefore, the rejection has been withdrawn.
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 RINA C PANCHOLI whose telephone number is (571)272-2679. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 7:30am-4pm.
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, Chirag Shah can be reached on 571-272-3144. 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.
/RINA C PANCHOLI/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2477 8/18/2026
Prosecution Insights