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 remarks filed on 11/5/2025.
Claims 1-3, 5-9 & 11-14 are pending and presented for examination.
Priority
Acknowledgment is made of applicant’s claim for foreign priority under 35 U.S.C. 119 (a)-(d). The certified copy has been filed in parent Application No. 2021-146412, filed on 9/8/2021.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statements (IDSs) submitted on 9/19/2025 and 11/6/2025 are in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, these information disclosure statements are being considered by the examiner.
Response to Amendments
Claim 10 has been cancelled. Claim 4 was previously cancelled.
Claims 1-3 & 5, 6, 8, 9, 11 and 12 have been amended. Amendments to claim 7 were previously presented.
Rejections to claims 1, 5-9, 11 & 12 under 35 U.S.C. 102 based on Patil et al. (US 2021/0014911)(herein after “Patil) have been withdrawn based on applicant’s amendments and arguments. However, new grounds of rejections of these claims under U.S.C. 103 have been introduced in view of new reference Kim et al. (WO 2022/035291)(herein after “Kim”).
Rejections to claims 2 & 3 under 35 U.S.C. 103 based on Patil in view of Patil et al. (IEEE 802.11-20/1044r0)(herein after “Patil-IEEE”) have been withdrawn based on applicant’s amendments and arguments. However, new grounds of rejections of these claims under U.S.C. 103 have been introduced in view of new reference Kim.
Rejection to claim 5 under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) and rejections to claims 5, 6 & 12 under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) have been introduced based on amendments to these claims.
Claims 13 and 14 have been added and examined.
Response to Arguments
Applicant submits that amended claims 1 & 8 are patentable because Patil et al. (US 2021/0014911) (herein after “Patil”) does not disclose all of the limitations of these amended claims. Examiner agrees and withdraws rejections of these claims under 35 U.S.C. 102 based on Patil. However, new grounds of rejections of these claims under U.S.C. 103 have been introduced in view of new reference Kim et al. (WO 2022/035291)(herein after “Kim”).
Regarding claims 1 & 8, applicant argues that Patil does not disclose “communicating, with the plurality of links set up between the communication apparatus and the other communication apparatus, an Action frame with the other communication apparatus, the Action frame being a frame for additionally setting up a third link different from the first link and from the second link between the communication apparatus and the other communication apparatus, wherein the Action frame includes information indicating a request for addition of the third link and information regarding TID (Traffic Identifier)-To-Link Mapping in the communication apparatus.”. Examiner agrees that Patil does not disclose an Action frame, however an Action frame is taught by Kim (see [0263]- [0264]). Examiner respectfully disagrees that Patil fails to teach “communicating, with the plurality of links set up between the communication apparatus and the other communication apparatus, … for additionally setting up a third link different from the first link and from the second link between the communication apparatus and the other communication apparatus, … including information indicating a request for addition of the third link and information regarding TID (Traffic Identifier)-To-Link Mapping in the communication apparatus.”. Patil does disclose an apparatus communicating with a plurality of links and setting up a third link different from the first and second links including information regarding TID Mapping for the apparatus (see Fig 9B & [0140]-[0147]).
Applicant argues that Patil fails to disclose that the first packet includes both discovery information and an association request regarding TID mapping for adding the second link. Although examiner respectfully disagrees, examiner notes that claims 1 & 8 only require “communicating an Association frame with another communication apparatus, the Association frame being a frame for setting up a plurality of links including a first link and a second link”. [0139] of Patil discloses that the first packet includes ML information for the first communication link and the one or more secondary communication links, uniquely identifying each link of the first communication link and the one or more secondary communication links. Clearly the first packet includes information “for setting up a plurality of links including a first link and a second link”.
Based on the above discussion, examiner withdraws rejections of claims 1 & 8 under 35 U.S.C. 102 based on Patil et al. (US 2021/0014911) but introduces new grounds of rejections of these claims under U.S.C. 103 in view of new reference Kim et al. (WO 2022/035291).
Applicant submits that claims 5-7, 9, 11 & 12 including any amendments traverse rejections to these claims under 35 U.S.C. 102 based on Patil due to their dependency on claims 1 or 8 and based on amendments and discussions above regarding claims 1 & 8. Examiner agrees and withdraws rejections of these claims under 35 U.S.C. 102 based on Patil. However, for the same reasons as discussed above, new grounds of rejections of these claims under U.S.C. 103 have been introduced in view of new reference Kim et al. (WO 2022/035291)(herein after “Kim”).
Applicant submits that amended claims 2 & 3 traverse rejections these claims under 35 U.S.C. 103 based on Patil et al. (US 2021/0014911) in view of Patil et al. (IEEE 802.11-20/1044r0)(herein after “Patil-IEEE”) due to their dependency on claims 1 or 8 and based on amendments and discussions above regarding claims 1 & 8. Examiner agrees and withdraws rejections of these claims under 35 U.S.C. 103 based on Patil in view of Patil-IEEE. However, for the same reasons as discussed above, new grounds of rejections of these claims under U.S.C. 103 have been introduced in view of new reference Kim et al. (WO 2022/035291)(herein after “Kim”).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a):
(a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention.
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112:
The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor of carrying out his invention.
Claim 5 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claim contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention.
Claim 5 recites, “wherein the instructions, when executed, further cause the communication apparatus to, in a case where transmission and reception on a link set up between the communication apparatus and the other communication apparatus by communicating the Association frame and on the
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 5, 6 & 12 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Claim 5 recites “cause the communication apparatus to, in a case where transmission and reception on a link set up between the communication apparatus and the other communication apparatus by communicating the Association frame and on the third link set up additionally between the communication apparatus and the other communication apparatus by communicating the Action frame in parallel are unable to be performed, assign, to the third link, a same TID as that of the link set up between the communication apparatus and the other communication apparatus by communicating the Association frame on the third link”. This limitation is contradictory as it requires communication of an Association frame on a third link in a case where transmission and reception on the third link is unable to be performed. For the purpose of this review, examiner is interpreting this claim as “cause the communication apparatus to, in a case where transmission and reception on a second link set up between the communication apparatus and the other communication apparatus by communicating the Association frame is unable to be performed, assign, to a third link, a same TID as that of the link set up between the communication apparatus and the other communication apparatus by communicating an Action frame on the third link”.
Claim 6 recites “information regarding TID-To-Link Mapping of the third link are stored in the TID-To-Link Mapping element of the Action frame”. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. For the purpose of this review, examiner is interpreting this claim as “information regarding TID-To-Link Mapping of the third link are stored in a TID-To-Link Mapping element of the Action frame”
Claim 12 recites “wherein the Response frame includes information that indicates a permission to add the second link requested for by the Action frame”. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. Claim 1 recites that the Action frame includes information indicating a request for addition of the third link, not the second link. For the purpose of this review, examiner is interpreting this claim as “wherein the Response frame includes information that indicates a permission to add the third link requested for by the Action frame”.
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.
Claims 1, 5-9 & 11-14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Patil et al. (US 2021/0014911) (herein after “Patil”) in view of Kim et al. (WO 2022/035291)(herein after “Kim”).
Regarding Claim 1, Patil discloses a communication apparatus (ABSTRACT – discloses apparatuses for associating wireless communication devices such as a wireless station (STA) of a STA multi-link device (MLD) with an access point (AP) MLD over a first communication link of the AP MLD and one or more secondary APs associated with one or more respective secondary communication links of the first AP MLD.) comprising:
at least one memory storing instructions ([0013] discloses at least one memory storing instructions.); and
at least one processor configured to execute the instructions, the instructions, when executed, causing the communication apparatus to perform operations ([0013] discloses at least one processor that may execute the instructions causing an AP MLD to perform operations.) comprising:
communicating an Association frame with another communication apparatus, the Association frame being a frame for setting up a plurality of links including a first link and a second link (Fig 9B & [0134] disclose a first device D1 transmitting a first packet including association information (i.e. an Association frame) to a second device D2 for setting up at least a first communication link and a second communication link.); and
communicating, with the plurality of links set up between the communication apparatus and the other communication apparatus, to additionally set up a third link different from the first link and from the second link between the communication apparatus and the other communication apparatus, including information indicating a request for addition of the third link and information regarding TID (Traffic Identifier)-To-Link Mapping in the communication apparatus (Fig 9B & [0140]-[0142] discloses the first Device D1 transmitting a second packet to, and establishing a common BA session with, the second Device D2, wherein the second packet and BA session establishes TID mapping for a plurality of communication links including the first communication link and the second communication link. [0143]-[0147] discloses that the first Device D1 may transmit a third packet indicating to remap TIDs to different links. The remapping of a TID may indicate the addition of a third communication link (e.g. adding third communication link to TID=4 or TID=6).).
Patil fails to disclose wherein the communicating is with an Action frame.
However, Kim teaches wherein the communicating is with an Action frame ([0263]-[0264] discloses an action frames formats for TID-to-link mapping request and response frames.).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have a communication apparatus communicating with a plurality of links set up between the communication apparatus and another communication apparatus, to additionally set up a third link different from the first link and from the second link between the communication apparatus and the other communication apparatus, including information indicating a request for addition of the third link and information regarding TID (Traffic Identifier)-To-Link Mapping in the communication apparatus, as disclosed by Patil, wherein the communicating is with an Action frame, as taught by Kim. The motivation to do so would be to have a communication apparatus transmit an action frame as part of a packet transmission to indicate the addition of a third communication link and TID mapping for the addition of the third communication link in order to improve throughput at the apparatus by transmitting on both the first and third communication links for apparatuses having Multi-Link capability.
Regarding Claim 5, Patil in view of Kim disclose the apparatus of claim 1.
Patil discloses wherein the instructions, when executed, further cause the communication apparatus to, in a case where transmission and reception on a link set up between the communication apparatus and the other communication apparatus by communicating the Association frame and on the third link set up additionally between the communication apparatus and the other communication apparatus by communicating the Action frame in parallel are unable to be performed, assign, to the third link, a same TID as that of the link set up between the communication apparatus and the other communication apparatus by communicating the Association frame on the third link ([0154] discloses that Device 1 may indicate that particular links are disabled (i.e. transmission and reception are unable to be performed). Fig 9B & [0146]-[0147] disclose that in cases where interference on a second link (i.e. which was setup by a second packet including associating information) may increase (or a link may be disabled due to increased interference), a third packet (i.e. an Action frame) may be transmitted to remap (i.e. assign ) a third link to a same TID=4 as set up for the second link.).
Regarding Claim 6, Patil in view of Kim disclose the apparatus of claim 1 including information regarding a TID-To-Link Mapping of the first link, information regarding TID-To-Link Mapping of the second link and information regarding TID-To-Link Mapping of the third link.
Patil fails to disclose wherein the TID to link mappings are stored in the TID-To-Link Mapping element of the Action frame.
However, Kim teaches wherein the TID to link mappings are stored in the TID-To-Link Mapping element of the Action frame ([0263]-[0264] discloses a TID-to-link element included in TID-to-link mapping of action frames such as request frames and response frames.).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have the apparatus of claim 1 including information regarding a TID-To-Link Mapping of the first link, information regarding TID-To-Link Mapping of the second link and information regarding TID-To-Link Mapping of the third link, as disclosed by Patil in view of Kim, wherein the TID to link mappings are stored in the TID-To-Link Mapping element of the Action frame, as taught by Kim. The motivation to do so would be to have an apparatus use action frames including elements for TID-to-link mapping to communicate with other apparatuses such that the other apparatuses can recognize when a TID-to-link mapping or re-mapping may occur by identifying a received frame as an action frame.
Regarding Claim 7, Patil in view of Kim disclose the apparatus of claim 1.
Patil discloses wherein the Action frame is an action frame conforming to an IEEE802.11 standard ([0069] discloses that the described inventions can be implemented according to one or more of the Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers (IEEE) 802.11 standards. Figs. 10 & [0148] discloses a frame that may be a beacon frame, a probe response frame, an association response frame, or some other appropriate frame (e.g. an Action frame).).
Regarding Claim 8, Patil discloses a communication method for a communication apparatus (ABSTRACT – discloses a method for associating wireless communication devices such as a wireless station (STA) of a STA multi-link device (MLD) with an access point (AP) MLD over a first communication link of the AP MLD and one or more secondary APs associated with one or more respective secondary communication links of the first AP MLD.), the communication method comprising:
communicating an Association frame with another communication apparatus, the Association frame being a frame setting up a plurality of links including a first link and a second link (Fig 9B & [0134] disclose a first device D1 transmitting a first packet including association information (i.e. an Association frame) to a second device D2 for setting up at least a first communication link and a second communication link.); and
communicating, with the plurality of links set up between the communication apparatus and the other communication apparatus, to additionally set up a third link different from the first link and from the second link between the communication apparatus and the other communication apparatus, including information indicating a request for addition of the third link and information regarding TID (Traffic Identifier)-To-Link Mapping in the communication apparatus (Fig 9B & [0140]-[0142] discloses the first Device D1 transmitting a second packet to, and establishing a common BA session with, the second Device D2, wherein the second packet and BA session establishes TID mapping for a plurality of communication links including the first communication link and the second communication link. [0143]-[0147] discloses that the first Device D1 may transmit a third packet indicating to remap TIDs to different links. The remapping of a TID may indicate the addition of a third communication link (e.g. adding third communication link to TID=4 or TID=6).).
Patil fails to disclose wherein the communicating is with an Action frame.
However, Kim teaches wherein the communicating is with an Action frame ([0263]-[0264] discloses an action frames formats for TID-to-link mapping request and response frames.).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have a method for a communication apparatus that is communicating, with a plurality of links set up between the communication apparatus and another communication apparatus, to additionally set up a third link different from the first link and from the second link between the communication apparatus and the other communication apparatus, including information indicating a request for addition of the third link and information regarding TID (Traffic Identifier)-To-Link Mapping in the communication apparatus, as disclosed by Patil, wherein the communicating is with an Action frame, as taught by Kim. The motivation to do so would be to have method for a communication apparatus to transmit an action frame as part of a packet transmission to indicate the addition of a third communication link and TID mapping for the addition of the third communication link in order to improve throughput at the apparatus by transmitting on both the first and third communication links for apparatuses having Multi-Link capability.
Regarding Claim 9, Patil in view of Kim discloses the communication method according to claim 8.
Patil discloses a non-transitory computer-readable storage medium storing a program configured to be executed by one or more processors of the communication apparatus, the program including instructions for causing the communication apparatus to perform the communication method according to Claim 8 ([0104] discloses a memory that can include tangible storage media such as random-access memory (RAM) or read-only memory (ROM), or combinations thereof. The memory also can store non-transitory processor- or computer-executable software (SW) code containing instructions that, when executed by a processor, cause the processor to perform various operations of the invention.).
Regarding Claim 11, Patil in view of Kim discloses the communication method according to claim 1.
Patil discloses additionally set up, between the communication apparatus and the other communication apparatus, the third link indicated by the information indicating the request for addition of the third link, and assign a TID to the third link ([0143]-[0147] discloses that the first Device D1 may transmit a third packet indicating to remap TIDs to different links. The third packet may request and assign TID remapping to add a third link, such as the addition of a third communication link to TID=4 or TID=6.).
Patil fails to disclose receiving a Response frame that is a response to the Action frame; and wherein the additionally setting up is upon receiving the Response frame.
However, Kim teaches receiving a Response frame, and wherein the additionally setting up is upon receiving the Response frame ([0263]-[0264] disclose TID-to-link mapping negotiation between ML devices using Action frames consisting of Response frames and Request frames. A broadest reasonable interpretation is that, as part of TID-to-link mapping negotiation a Response frame is transmitted in response to a Request frame (i.e. the Action frame consisting of the third packet transmitted as disclosed by Patil).).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have the method of claim 1 including additionally setting up, between the communication apparatus and the other communication apparatus, a third link indicated by the information indicating the request for addition of the third link, as disclosed by Patil in view of Kim, and receiving a Response frame that is a response to the Action frame; and wherein the additionally setting up is upon receiving the Response frame, as taught by Kim. The motivation to do so would be to have method for a communication apparatus to communicate with another apparatus through Action frames and response frames to negotiate the addition of a third communication link and TID mapping for the addition of the third communication link in order to improve throughput at the apparatus by transmitting on both the first and third communication links for apparatuses having Multi-Link capability.
Regarding Claim 12, Patil in view of Kim discloses the communication method according to claim 11.
Patil discloses wherein the Response frame includes information that indicates a permission to add the second link requested for by the Action frame (Fig 9B & [0143]-[0147] discloses that the first Device D1 may transmit a third packet indicating to remap TIDs to different links. The third packet may request and assign TID remapping to add a third link (i.e. indicate permission to add the third link), such as the addition of a third communication link to TID=4 or TID=6.)).
Regarding claim 13, Patil in view of Kim discloses the communication method according to claim 1.
Patil fails to disclose wherein the Action frame includes a TID-To-Link Mapping element, and wherein the information regarding TID-To-Link Mapping in the communication apparatus is included in the TID- To-Link Mapping element.
However, Kim teaches wherein the Action frame includes a TID-To-Link Mapping element, and wherein the information regarding TID-To-Link Mapping in the communication apparatus is included in the TID- To-Link Mapping element ([0263]-[0264] discloses a TID-to-link element included in TID-to-link mapping of action frames such as request frames and response frames that includes information regarding TID-to-link mapping negotiation between ML devices.).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have the apparatus of claim 1, as disclosed by Patil in view of Kim, wherein the Action frame includes a TID-To-Link Mapping element, and wherein the information regarding TID-To-Link Mapping in the communication apparatus is included in the TID- To-Link Mapping element, as taught by Kim. The motivation to do so would be to have an apparatus use action frames including elements for TID-to-link mapping to communicate with other apparatuses such that the other apparatuses can recognize when a TID-to-link mapping or re-mapping may occur by identifying a received frame as an action frame.
Regarding claim 14, Patil in view of Kim discloses the communication method according to claim 13.
Patil discloses wherein the TID-To-Link Mapping element includes Link Mapping of TID 0 field, Link Mapping of TID 1 field, Mapping of TID 2 field, Mapping of TID 3 field, Mapping of TID 4 field, Mapping of TID 5 field, Mapping of TID 6 field, and Mapping of TID 7 field (Fig 9B and [0146]-[0147] discloses that the third packet may dynamically map (i.e. include filed for mapping) TIDs to any set of communication links include TID-To-Link Mapping elements for TID=2, TID=3, TID=4, TID=5 & TID=6.).
Patil fails to include TID-To-Link Mapping fields for TID=0, TID=1 and TID=7.
However, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have additional TID-To-Link Mapping fields for TID=0, TID=1 and TID=7, since it has been held that mere duplication of parts that does not produce new or unexpected results involves only routine skill in the art and thus has no patentable significance (MPEP Section 2144.04, subsection VI.B). The motivation to do so would be to have a device that can dynamically map 8 different TIDs to 8 different combinations of communication links (e.g. TID=0 maps to a first link, TID=1 maps to a second link, TID=2 maps to a third link, TID=3 maps to the first and the second link, TID=4 maps to the first and the third link, etc.) in order to enable fast switching between communication links used in ML communication between two devices by sending a packet indicating to switch TIDs.
Claims 2 & 3 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Patil et al. (US 2021/0014911) (herein after “Patil”) in view of Kim et al. (WO 2022/035291)(herein after “Kim”) and further in view of Patil et al. (IEEE 802.11-20/1044r0)(herein after “Patil-IEEE”).
Regarding Claim 2, Patil in view of Kim discloses the apparatus of Claim 13, wherein the instructions, when executed, cause the communications apparatus to perform operations.
Patil fails to disclose wherein the operations include mapping of a TID for the second link without changing mapping of a TID for the first link.
However, Patil-IEEE further teaches wherein the controlling unit performs the control so as to perform the mapping of the TID for the second link without changing mapping of the TID for the first link (Slide 7, 1st figure on left – discloses a scenario where TID-4 is mapped to a first link at 5 GHz and then TID-4 is set to a second link at 2.4 GHz without changing the TID-4 setting on the first link at 5 GHz.).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the apparatus of claim 13, as disclosed by Patil in view of Kim, to include performing control so as to map a TID for the second link without changing the mapping of the TID for the first link, as further taught by Patil-IEEE. The motivation for doing so would be to provide a protocol for determining the result of a TID-to-link negotiation for including a second link that minimizes overhead.
Regarding Claim 3, Patil in view of Kim and Patil-IEEE disclose the apparatus of Claim 2.
Patil fails to disclose wherein the TID includes multiple types of TIDs, and each of the multiple types of TIDs is able to be mapped to the first link or the second link, or the first link and the second link.
However, Patil-IEEE further teaches wherein the TID includes multiple types of TIDs, and each of the multiple types of TIDs is able to be mapped to the first link or the second link, or the first link and the second link (Slide 2, 2nd bullet, 3rd sub-bullet - discloses multiple types of TIDs including a high-volume, latency tolerant traffic flow TIDbe and a latency sensitive flow TIDvo. Each TID is able to be mapped to a first link or a second link (e.g. TIDbe is only mapped to STAa 1/STAb 1) or mapped to a first link and a second link (e.g. TIDvo is mapped to STAa1/STAb 1 and STAa2/STAb2).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have the apparatus of claim 2, as disclosed by Patil in view of Kim and Patil-IEEE, wherein the TID includes multiple types of TIDs, and each of the multiple types of TIDs is able to be mapped to the first link or the second link, or the first link and the second link, as further taught by Patil-IEEE. The motivation to do so would be to have an STA that can map latency sensitive flow TIDs to multiple links to provide better higher throughput & reduced latency, while mapping latency tolerant flow TIDs to only a subset of links that provides lower throughput but can withstand higher latency.
Patil fails to disclose wherein the TID includes eight types of TIDs.
However, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to add 3rd through 8th types of TIDs, for example TID3 through TID8 to the figure in slide 2 of Patil-IEEE and map TID3 through TID8 to subsets of links (e.g. to a first or second link, or to a first and second link), since it has been held that mere duplication of parts that does not produce new or unexpected results involves only routine skill in the art and thus has no patentable significance (MPEP Section 2144.04, subsection VI.B). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include eight types of TIDs, and each of the eight types of TIDs is able to be mapped to the first link or the second link, or the first link and the second link. The motivation to do so would be to have an STA that can map 8 different types of TIDs, each with different quality of experience (QoE) requirements, to multiple links to optimize the QoE of each TID by mapping higher throughput, lower latency tolerant QoE TIDs to more links and lower throughput, higher latency tolerant QoE TIDs to fewer links.).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JAMES P SEYMOUR whose telephone number is (571)272-7654. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8-5 EST.
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, Nishant Divecha can be reached at (571) 270-3125. 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.
/JAMES P SEYMOUR/Examiner, Art Unit 2419
/Nishant Divecha/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2419