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 .
Priority
Acknowledgment is made of applicant's claim for foreign priority based on an application filed in REPUBLIC OF KOREA on 09/29/2021. It is noted, however, that applicant has not filed a certified copy of the KR10-2021-0129137 application as required by 37 CFR 1.55.
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 for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(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.
Claims 1 and 17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a1) as being anticipated by Baron et al (US20180198726A1).
Regarding claim 1, Baron’726 discloses a method of an access point (AP) (see, Fig. 1, AP communicates with stations in WLAN through EDCA, par 0085, 0099), the method comprising:
performing, by a processor (Fig. 6, CPU can be equated to processor, par 0162), backoff procedures (backoff procedure for a AC and backoff procedures for corresponding ACs can be equated to backoff procedures, par 0123-0124) for all access categories (ACs) (Fig. 2a, 4 ACs in four corresponding transmission/traffic queues can be equated to all access categories (ACs), par 0106) for transmission to a first station (STA) (see, Fig. 2a, source node (AP) performs backoff procedures for corresponding ACs in queues to a station, par 0088, 0123-0124, 0158. Noted, SU EDCA for single user, par 0158);
in response that a first backoff procedure among the backoff procedures succeeds (backoff procedure for an AC ends, par 0124. Noted, backoff counter reaches zero can be equated to backoff procedures succeeds, par 0090), transmitting, by the processor (Fig. 6, CPU can be equated to processor, par 0162), a first data frame (data frame can be equated to first data frame, par 0124) associated with the first backoff procedure to the first STA (see, Fig. 2a, transmitting node (AP) transmits data frame backoff procedure for an AC of 4 ACs ends, par 0088, 0123-0124); and
receiving, by the processor (Fig. 6, CPU can be equated to processor, par 0162), a reception response frame (ACK of sent data frame can be equated to reception response frame for the first data frame, par 0092) for the first data frame from the first STA (see, transmitting node (AP) receives ACK of the sent data frames from the receiving node (station), par 0092).
Regarding claim 17, Baron’726 discloses an access point (AP) (see, Fig. 1 and 6, AP communicates with stations in WLAN through EDCA, par 0085, 0099, 0162) comprising:
a processor (see, Fig. 6, CPU, par 0162); and
a memory storing one or more instructions executable by the processor (see, Fig. 6, ROM/RAM storing computer programs to executed by CPU, par 0162), wherein the one or more instructions are executed by the processor to perform (see, Fig. 6, computer programs executed by CPU to implement the method, par 0162):
performing backoff procedures (backoff procedure for a AC and backoff procedures for corresponding ACs can be equated to backoff procedures, par 0123-0124) for all access categories (ACs) (Fig. 2a, 4 ACs in four corresponding transmission/traffic queues can be equated to all access categories (ACs), par 0106) for transmission to a first station (STA) (see, Fig. 2a, source node (AP) performs backoff procedures for corresponding ACs in queues to a station, par 0088, 0123-0124, 0158. Noted, SU EDCA for single user, par 0158);
in response that a first backoff procedure among the backoff procedures succeeds (backoff procedure for an AC ends, par 0124. Noted, backoff counter reaches zero can be equated to backoff procedures succeeds, par 0090), transmitting a first data frame (data frame can be equated to first data frame, par 0124) associated with the first backoff procedure to the first STA (see, Fig. 2a, transmitting node (AP) transmits data frame backoff procedure for an AC of 4 ACs ends, par 0088, 0123-0124); and
receiving a reception response frame (ACK of sent data frame can be equated to reception response frame for the first data frame, par 0092) for the first data frame from the first STA (see, transmitting node (AP) receives ACK of the sent data frames from the receiving node (station), par 0092).
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 for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim 11 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a2) as being anticipated by Hwang et al (US20220287121A1, PCT Priority Date: Jul 08, 2020).
Regarding claim 11, Hwang’121 discloses a method of an access point (AP) (see, Fig. 9, AP MLD communicates with STD MLD through multi-link operation by configuring through primary link, par 0121-0123), the method comprising:
performing a first backoff procedure for a first access category (AC) (backoff procedure with backoff value for corresponding AC on primary link can be equated to first backoff procedure for a first access category (AC), par 0091, 0112) on an actual link (primary link with management frame to configure multi-link and channel state monitoring can be equated to actual link, par 0027, 0113) and a second backoff procedure for the first AC (backoff procedure with backoff value for corresponding AC on link other than primary link can be equated to second backoff procedure for the first AC, par 0091, 0112) on a virtual link (secondary link being configured by primary link without channel state monitoring can be equated to virtual link, par 0027, 0117), for transmission to a first station (STA) (see, Fig. 7, AP MLD performs channel access operation with the same backoff value for corresponding AC on primary link and secondary link before transmitting data frame to STA MLD, abstract, par 0089, 0112. Noted, transmit a data frame in the plurality of links and thus same AC, abstract, par 0089);
in response to that the first backoff procedure succeeds, transmitting a first data frame associated with the first backoff procedure to the first STA (see, Fig. 7, AP MLD transmits data frame on primary link after primary link is determined to be idle for the backoff period, par 0092, 0109); and
receiving a reception response frame for the first data frame from the first STA (see, AP receives response frame for the data frame on primary link (link 1) from STA MLD, par 0110).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in col. 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.
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.
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.
Claims 2, 5, 18 and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Baron’726 in view of Ghosh et al (US20170195954A1).
Regarding claim 2, Baron’726 discloses the method of claim 1 (see, Fig. 1, AP communicates with stations in WLAN through EDCA, par 0085, 0099).
Baron’726 discloses all the claim limitations but fails to explicitly teach:
wherein the first data frame is transmitted within a restricted target wake time (rTWT) service period (SP), and in response that a time from a time of receiving the reception response frame to an end time of the rTWP SP is equal to or larger than a predefined time, a transmission procedure of a second data frame is performed by the processor within the rTWT SP after receipt of the reception response frame.
However Ghosh’954 from the same field of endeavor (see, Fig. 1, restrictive TWT SP utilized for communication between APs and user devices, par 0028) discloses:
wherein the first data frame (Fig. 3, DL data trigger by trigger frame 312 can be equated to first data frame, par 0054) is transmitted within a restricted target wake time (rTWT) service period (SP) (see, Fig. 3, DL data trigger by trigger frame 312 transmitted within restrictive TWT SP, par 0047, 0054), and in response that a time from a time of receiving the reception response frame to an end time of the rTWP SP is equal to or larger than a predefined time (see, remaining from end of the ACK transmission in DL MU operation to the end of the TWT SP, par 0055), a transmission procedure of a second data frame (see, Fig. 3, DL data trigger by next trigger frame 316 transmitted within restrictive TWT SP, par 0049, 0054) is performed by the processor within the rTWT SP after receipt of the reception response frame (see, Fig. 3, AP will not send next Trigger frame for next DL data in remaining duration of restricted TWT SP if the trigger frame is within a certain threshold from the end of the TWT SP, par 0047, 0049, 0051, 0054-0055).
In view of the above, it would have been obvious before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains to implement the method as taught by Ghosh’954 into that of Baron’726. The motivation would have been to improve the efficiency of Wi-Fi, and specifically the efficiency in dense deployments of Wi-Fi devices (par 0013).
Regarding claim 5, Baron’726 discloses the method of claim 1 (see, Fig. 1, AP communicates with stations in WLAN through EDCA, par 0085, 0099).
Baron’726 discloses all the claim limitations but fails to explicitly teach:
wherein the first data frame is transmitted within the rTWT SP, and in response that a time from a time of receiving the reception response frame to an end time of the rTWP SP is equal to or larger than a predefined time, a transmission procedure of a trigger frame for uplink resource allocation is performed by the processor within the rTWT SP.
However Ghosh’954 from the same field of endeavor (see, Fig. 1, restrictive TWT SP utilized for communication between APs and user devices, par 0028) discloses:
wherein the first data frame (Fig. 3, DL data trigger by trigger frame 312 can be equated to first data frame, par 0054) is transmitted within the rTWT SP (see, Fig. 3, DL data trigger by trigger frame 312 transmitted within restrictive TWT SP, par 0047, 0054), and in response that a time from a time of receiving the reception response frame to an end time of the rTWP SP is equal to or larger than a predefined time (see, remaining from end of the ACK transmission in DL MU operation to the end of the TWT SP, par 0055), a transmission procedure of a trigger frame for uplink resource allocation is performed by the processor within the rTWT SP (Note, Fig. 3 and 4A, AP will not send Trigger frame for UL data in remaining duration of restricted TWT SP if the trigger frame is within a certain threshold from the end of the TWT SP after transmitting DL data, par 0047, 0049, 0051, 0054-0055. noted, user devices send and receive transmissions to and from AP within a TWT SP, and thus both downlink and uplink within r-TWT, par 0061. Noted further, remaining time computed from the end of the ACK transmission in UL MU operation after DL MU operation, par 0055).
In view of the above, it would have been obvious before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains to implement the method as taught by Ghosh’954 into that of Baron’726. The motivation would have been to improve the efficiency of Wi-Fi, and specifically the efficiency in dense deployments of Wi-Fi devices (par 0013).
Regarding claim 18, Claim 18 recites an AP performing the steps recited in claim 2 and thereby, is rejected for the reasons discussed above with respect to claim 2.
Regarding claim 20, Claim 20 recites an AP performing the steps recited in claim 5 and thereby, is rejected for the reasons discussed above with respect to claim 5.
Claims 3 and 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Baron’726 in view of Ghosh’954 as applied to claims 2 and 18 above respectively, and further in view of Ajami et al (US20230049192A1, Priority Date: Aug 13, 2021).
Regarding claim 3, Baron’726 modified by Ghosh’954 discloses the method of claim 2 (see, Fig. 1, AP communicates with stations in WLAN through EDCA, par 0085, 0099).
Baron’726 and Ghosh’954 discloses all the claim limitations but fails to explicitly teach: wherein the first data frame is an rTWT data frame, and the second data frame is a general data frame not including time sensitive network (TSN) data.
However Ajami’192 from the same field of endeavor (see, Fig. 1, AP communicates with STAs in WLAN, par 0039) discloses:
wherein the first data frame is an rTWT data frame (see, Fig. 5, low-latency STA communicates data traffic in TXOP as member of r-TWT SP, par 0077), and the second data frame is a general data frame not including time sensitive network (TSN) data (see, non-legacy STA as non-member of the restricted TWT SP communicates data traffic (other traffic than latency-sensitive traffic) in TXOP, par 0038, 0071, 0077, 0079. Noted, low-latency STA with latency-sensitive traffic and non-member STAs with all other traffic than latency-sensitive traffic, par 0038).
In view of the above, it would have been obvious before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains to implement the method as taught by Ajami’192 into that of Baron’726 modified by Ghosh’954. The motivation would have been to provide adequate protection for latency-sensitive traffic in restricted TWT SP (par 0070).
Regarding claim 19, Claim 19 recites an AP performing the steps recited in claim 3 and thereby, is rejected for the reasons discussed above with respect to claim 3.
Claim 4 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Baron’726 in view of Ghosh’954, and further in view of Ajami’192 as applied to claim 3 above, and further in view of Ho et al (US20220070772A1, Priority Date: Aug 26, 2021).
Regarding claim 4, Baron’726 modified by Ghosh’954 and Ajami’192 discloses the method of claim 3 (see, Fig. 1, AP communicates with stations in WLAN through EDCA, par 0085, 0099).
Baron’726, Ghosh’954 and Ajami’192 discloses all the claim limitations but fails to explicitly teach: wherein the rTWT data frame is a delay-sensitive data frame, and is identified by an indicator included in the rTWT data frame.
However Ho’772 from the same field of endeavor (see, Fig. 1 and 13A, AP communicates with STAs in WLAN by supporting restricted TWT sessions, par 0046, 0084) discloses:
wherein the rTWT data frame is a delay-sensitive data frame (see, Fig. 13A, latency sensitive traffic in restricted TWT SP, par 0084, 0090), and is identified by an indicator (receiver address or destination address can be equated to indicator, par 0058) included in the rTWT data frame (see, MAC header in restricted TWT SP carries receiver address or destination address, and AP responsible for the mapping between TID and STA (receiver address), par 0058, 0088).
In view of the above, it would have been obvious before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains to implement the method as taught by Ho’772 into that of Baron’726 modified by Ghosh’954 and Ajami’192. The motivation would have been to establish a restricted TWT session on a wireless medium for STAs associated with latency sensitive traffic (par 0006).
Claims 6-7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Baron’726 in view of Kim et al (US20240064810A1, Foreign PCT Priority Date: May 6, 2021), and further in view of Kim et al (US20240064810A1, Foreign PCT Priority Date: May 6, 2021).
Regarding claim 6, Baron’726 discloses the method of claim 1 (see, Fig. 1, AP communicates with stations in WLAN through EDCA, par 0085, 0099), further comprising.
Baron’726 discloses all the claim limitations but fails to explicitly teach:
performing by the processor the backoff procedures for all the ACs for transmission to a second STA after an arbitration interframe space (AIFS) elapses from a time of receiving the reception response frame; and
in response that a second backoff procedure among the backoff procedures succeeds, transmitting by the processor a third data frame associated with the second backoff procedure to the second STA.
However Kim’810 from the same field of endeavor (see, Fig. 3, data frame transmission between AP MLD and STA MLD in a wireless LAN system supporting multi-link , par 0072) discloses:
performing by the processor (Fig. 1, processor of AP or AP MLD can be equated to processor, par 0055-0056) the backoff procedure for transmission to a second STA (Fig. 7, STA1 and STA2 on first and second links respectively can be equated to first and second STA, par 0104) after an arbitration interframe space (AIFS) elapses (Fig. 12, AIFS elapses after BA can be equated to arbitration interframe space (AIFS) elapses, par 0108) from a time (from a reception completion time of a BA frame for the AC_BE frame on the first link can be equated to from a time of receiving the reception response frame, par 0108) of receiving the reception response frame (see, Fig. 7 and 12, AP2 starts backoff operation after AIFS elapses from reception completion time of a BA frame for the AC_BE frame on the first link to STA1 and then transmits on second link after backoff operations, par 0108, 0145, 0148); and
in response that a second backoff procedure (Fig. 12, backoff operation after BA can be equated to second backoff procedure, par 0145) among the backoff procedures (backoff operation among a plurality of backoff operations for a plurality of ACs, par 0145, 0148) succeeds, transmitting by the processor (Fig. 1, processor of AP or AP MLD can be equated to processor, par 0055-0056) a third data frame (AC_VI frame can be equated to third data frame, par 0145) associated with the second backoff procedure to the second STA (see, Fig. 12, AP2 transmits AC_VI frame to STA2 when backoff operation (among a plurality of backoff operations for a plurality of ACs) with BO counted down to zero after receiving BA, par 0145, 0148).
In view of the above, it would have been obvious before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains to implement the method as taught by Kim’810 into that of Baron’726. The motivation would have been to provide method for data transmission and reception for a device not supporting STR operations in multi-link communication system (par 0008).
The combination of Baron’726 and Kim’810 discloses all the claim limitations but fails to explicitly teach: performing by the processor the backoff procedures for all the ACs for transmission to a second STA.
However Kim’810 from the same field of endeavor (see, Fig. 3, data frame transmission between AP MLD and STA MLD in a wireless LAN system supporting multi-link , par 0072) discloses: performing by the processor the backoff procedures for all the ACs for transmission to a second STA (see, Fig. 12, a plurality of backoff operations for a plurality of ACs performed on second link (to STA2), par 0139).
In view of the above, it would have been obvious before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains to implement the method as taught by Kim’810 into that of Baron’726 modified by Kim’810. The motivation would have been to provide method for data transmission and reception for a device not supporting STR operations in multi-link communication system (par 0008).
Regarding claim 7, Baron’726 discloses the method of claim 6 (see, Fig. 1, AP communicates with stations in WLAN through EDCA, par 0085, 0099), wherein the backoff procedures for all the ACs (each backoff procedure for each AC queue of multiple ACs can be equated to backoff procedures for all the ACs, par 0110, 0124) include an AC_VO backoff procedure, AC_VI backoff procedure, AC_BE backoff procedure, and AC_BK backoff procedure (see, each AC of multiple ACs (including AC_VO, AC_VI, AC_BE and AC_BG) using respective backoff procedure with respective backoff value, par 0106, 0110, 0124), and each of the first backoff procedure and the second backoff procedure is one of the AC_VO backoff procedure, the AC_VI backoff procedure, the AC_BE backoff procedure, and the AC_BK backoff procedure (see, Fig. 2a, four ACs (including AC_VO, AC_VI, AC_BE and AC_BG) and each AC using respective backoff procedure with respective backoff value in parallel and thus first and second backoff procedure, par 0106, 0110).
Claims 8-10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Baron’726 in view of Kim’810, and further in view of Kim’810 as applied to claim 6 above, and further in view of Ajami’192.
Regarding claim 8, Baron’726 modified by Kim’810 and Kim’810 discloses the method of claim 6 (see, Fig. 1, AP communicates with stations in WLAN through EDCA, par 0085, 0099).
The combination of Baron’726, Kim’810 and Kim’810 discloses all the claim limitations but fails to explicitly teach:
wherein the first data frame is transmitted by the processor in a period including a first time slot (TS) allocated to the first STA within an rTWT SP, and the third data frame is transmitted in a period including a second TS allocated to the second STA within the rTWT SP.
However Ajami’192 from the same field of endeavor (see, Fig. 1, AP communicates with STAs in WLAN, par 0039) discloses:
wherein the first data frame (traffic from AP for STA 502 within TXOP can be equated to first data frame, par 0072-0073) is transmitted by the processor in a period including a first time slot (TS) (TXOP (period of time) for STA 501, par 0033, 0072-0073) allocated to the first STA within an rTWT SP (see, Fig. 5, STA 502 receive latency-sensitive traffic from AP during granted TXOP within rTWT SP, par 0033, 0072-0073), and the third data frame (traffic from AP for STA 504 within TXOP can be equated to second data frame, par 0072-0073) is transmitted in a period including a second TS allocated (TXOP granted can be equated to TS allocated, par 0033) to the second STA within the rTWT SP (see, Fig. 5, STA 504 receive latency-sensitive traffic from AP during granted TXOP within rTWT SP, par 0033, 0072-0073, 0076. Noted, low-latency STA may transmit latency-sensitive traffic to, or receive latency-sensitive traffic from an AP during the TXOP, par 0073. Noted further, any number of low-latency STAs and any number of non-legacy STAs, par 0071).
In view of the above, it would have been obvious before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains to implement the method as taught by Ajami’192 into that of Baron’726 modified by Kim’810 and Kim’810. The motivation would have been to provide adequate protection for latency-sensitive traffic in restricted TWT SP (par 0070).
Regarding claim 9, Baron’726 modified by Kim’810 and Kim’810 discloses the method of claim 8 (see, Fig. 1, AP communicates with stations in WLAN through EDCA, par 0085, 0099).
The combination of Baron’726, Kim’810 and Kim’810 discloses all the claim limitations but fails to explicitly teach:
wherein if the second backoff procedure is completed before a start time of the second TS, the second backoff procedure is performed again so that the third data frame is transmitted at or after the start time of the second TS.
However Ajami’192 from the same field of endeavor (see, Fig. 1, AP communicates with STAs in WLAN, par 0039) discloses:
wherein if the second backoff procedure (RBO countdown can be equated to second backoff procedure, par 0068) is completed (RBO countdown terminates can be equated to second backoff procedure is completed, 0068) before a start time of the second TS (TXOP can be equated to second TS, par 0068), the second backoff procedure is performed again (new RBO countdown can be equated to second backoff procedure is performed again, par 0068) so that the third data frame (traffic from AP for STA within TXOP can be equated to third data frame, par 0072-0073. Noted, any number of low-latency STAs and any number of non-legacy STAs) is transmitted at or after the start time of the second TS (see, STA performs new RBO countdown to acquire TXOP for reception traffic from AP when RBO countdown terminates before TXOP in r-TWT SP, par 0068).
In view of the above, it would have been obvious before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains to implement the method as taught by Ajami’192 into that of Baron’726 modified by Kim’810 and Kim’810. The motivation would have been to provide adequate protection for latency-sensitive traffic in restricted TWT SP (par 0070).
Regarding claim 10, Baron’726 modified by Kim’810 and Kim’810 discloses the method of claim 6 (see, Fig. 1, AP communicates with stations in WLAN through EDCA, par 0085, 0099).
The combination of Baron’726, Kim’810 and Kim’810 discloses all the claim limitations but fails to explicitly teach:
wherein in a procedure for the transmission to the second STA, a backoff counter value of the first backoff procedure is set to a new value, and a backoff counter value of each of remaining backoff procedures excluding the first backoff procedure among the backoff procedures is set to a remaining value in a procedure for the transmission to the first STA.
However Ajami’192 from the same field of endeavor (see, Fig. 1, AP communicates with STAs in WLAN, par 0039) discloses:
wherein in a procedure for the transmission to the second STA (Fig. 6, member low-latency STA of restricted TWT SP can be equated to second STA and restricted TWT SP for member STA can be equated to procedure for the transmission to the second STA, par 0080), a backoff counter value of the first backoff procedure is set to a new value (see, non-member (non-legacy) STA without starting RBO countdown before start of restricted TWT SP required to reset RBO for RBO countdown at the start of each restricted TWT SP, par 0080, 0083), and a backoff counter value of each of remaining backoff procedures excluding the first backoff procedure among the backoff procedures is set to a remaining value in a procedure for the transmission to the first STA (see, any non-member STAs starting RBO countdown before start of restricted TWT SP (excluding non-member STA didn’t start RBO countdown) continues to count down RBO, par 0080, 0083. Noted, any number of non-legacy STAs (non-member of the restricted TWT SP) and any number of low-latency STAs applies, par 0080. Noted further, Fig. 7, for continues to count down an RBO, the non-legacy STA 706 must defer medium access for quiet duration, par 0090).
In view of the above, it would have been obvious before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains to implement the method as taught by Ajami’192 into that of Baron’726 modified by Kim’810 and Kim’810. The motivation would have been to provide adequate protection for latency-sensitive traffic in restricted TWT SP (par 0070).
Claim 12 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hwang’121 in view of Fang et al (US20220132611A1, PCT Cont Priority Date: Jul 10, 2019).
Regarding claim 12, Hwang’121 discloses the method of claim 11 (see, Fig. 9, AP MLD communicates with STD MLD through multi-link operation by configuring through primary link, par 0121-0123), further comprising.
Hwang’121 discloses all the claim limitations but fails to explicitly teach:
performing a third backoff procedure for a second AC on the actual link and a fourth backoff procedure for the second AC on the virtual link, for transmission to the first STA, wherein the first backoff procedure, the second backoff procedure, the third backoff procedure, and the fourth backoff procedure are performed in a same time period.
However Fang’611 from the same field of endeavor (see, Fig. 1, ML-BSS including multiple ML stations under the coverage of multiple ML AP, par 0064) discloses:
performing a third backoff procedure for a second AC on the actual link (link 551 (CH1) can be equated to actual link, par 0119) and a fourth backoff procedure for the second AC on the virtual link (see, Fig. 5B-5C, ML-AP finds CH1 and CH3 are available after the ML backoff counter corresponding to access category for high data throughput transmission reaches to 0, par 0121. Noted, link 553 (CH3) can be equated to virtual link, par 0119. Noted further, access category for high reliable transmission in Fig. 5B and access category for high data throughput transmission in Fig. 5B can be equated to first and second AC, par 0119, 0121), for transmission to the first STA (see, Fig. 5B-5C, ML-AP performs backoff procedures on link 551 (CH1) and link 553 (CH3) independently before data transmission with corresponding access category to ML-STA, par 0119, 0121), wherein the first backoff procedure, the second backoff procedure, the third backoff procedure, and the fourth backoff procedure are performed in a same time period (see, Fig. 7B step 701, ML-AP perform the ML physical carrier sensing on possibly available channels using backoff counter settings of the access categories using same EDCA parameters (backoff counter, CW, CWmin, CWmax and AIFSN), and backoff on four different channels can be equated to first, second, third and fourth backoff procedure respectively, par 0084, 0112, 0132. Noted, same period (same starting point and same ending before RTS) indicated by Fig. 7B step 701 and due to same set of EDCA parameters (backoff counter, CW (contention window), CWmin, CWmax and AIFSN), par 0084, 0132-0133).
In view of the above, it would have been obvious before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains to implement the method as taught by Fang’611 into that of Hwang’121. The motivation would have been to establish ML transmission protection for ML transmissions (par 0130).
Claim 13 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hwang’121 in view of Kim’810, and further in view of Kim’810.
Regarding claim 13, Hwang’121 discloses the method of claim 11 (see, Fig. 9, AP MLD communicates with STD MLD through multi-link operation by configuring through primary link, par 0121-0123), further comprising.
Hwang’121 discloses all the claim limitations but fails to explicitly teach:
performing the first backoff procedure and the second backoff procedure for transmission to a second STA, after an arbitration interframe space (AIFS) from a time of receiving the reception response frame; and
in response that the second backoff procedure succeeds, transmitting a second data frame associated with the second backoff procedure to the second STA.
However Kim’810 from the same field of endeavor (see, Fig. 3, data frame transmission between AP MLD and STA MLD in a wireless LAN system supporting multi-link , par 0072) discloses:
performing the first backoff procedure for transmission to a second STA (Fig. 7, STA1 and STA2 on first and second links respectively can be equated to first and second STA, par 0104), after an arbitration interframe space (AIFS) (Fig. 12, AIFS elapses after BA can be equated to arbitration interframe space (AIFS) from a time of receiving the reception response frame, par 0108) from a time (from a reception completion time of a BA frame for the AC_BE frame on the first link can be equated to from a time of receiving the reception response frame, par 0108) of receiving the reception response frame (see, Fig. 7 and 12, AP2 starts backoff operation after AIFS elapses from reception completion time of a BA frame for the AC_BE frame on the first link to STA1 and then transmits on second link after backoff operations, par 0108, 0145, 0148); and
in response that the second backoff procedure succeeds (Fig. 12, backoff operation after BA can be equated to second backoff procedure, par 0145), transmitting a second data frame (AC_VI frame can be equated to second data frame, par 0145) associated with the second backoff procedure to the second STA (see, Fig. 12, AP2 transmits AC_VI frame to STA2 when backoff operation (among a plurality of backoff operations for a plurality of ACs) with BO counted down to zero after receiving BA, par 0145, 0148).
In view of the above, it would have been obvious before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains to implement the method as taught by Kim’810 into that of Hwang’121. The motivation would have been to provide method for data transmission and reception for a device not supporting STR operations in multi-link communication system (par 0008).
The combination of Hwang’121 and Kim’810 discloses all the claim limitations but fails to explicitly teach:
performing the first backoff procedure and the second backoff procedure for transmission to a second STA.
However Kim’810 from the same field of endeavor (see, Fig. 3, data frame transmission between AP MLD and STA MLD in a wireless LAN system supporting multi-link , par 0072) discloses: performing the first backoff procedure and the second backoff procedure for transmission to a second STA (see, Fig. 12, a plurality of backoff operations for a plurality of ACs performed on second link (to STA2), par 0139).
In view of the above, it would have been obvious before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains to implement the method as taught by Kim’810 into that of Hwang’121 modified by Kim’810. The motivation would have been to provide method for data transmission and reception for a device not supporting STR operations in multi-link communication system (par 0008).
Claims 14-16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hwang’121 in view of Kim’810, and further in view of Kim’810 as applied to claim 13 above, and further in view of Ajami’192.
Regarding claim 14, Hwang’121 modified by Kim’810 and Kim’810 discloses the method of claim 13 (see, Fig. 9, AP MLD communicates with STD MLD through multi-link operation by configuring through primary link, par 0121-0123).
The combination of Hwang’121, Kim’810 and Kim’810 discloses all the claim limitations but fails to explicitly teach:
wherein the first data frame is transmitted in a period including a first time slot (TS) allocated to the first STA within an rTWT SP, and the second data frame is transmitted in a period including a second TS allocated to the second STA within the rTWT SP.
However Ajami’192 from the same field of endeavor (see, Fig. 1, AP communicates with STAs in WLAN, par 0039) discloses:
wherein the first data frame (traffic from AP for STA 502 within TXOP can be equated to first data frame, par 0072-0073) is transmitted in a period including a first time slot (TS) (TXOP for STA 501, par 0072-0073) allocated to the first STA within an rTWT SP (see, Fig. 5, STA 502 receive latency-sensitive traffic from AP during granted TXOP within rTWT SP, par 0033, 0072-0073), and the second data frame (traffic from AP for STA 504 within TXOP can be equated to second data frame, par 0072-0073) is transmitted in a period including a second TS allocated to the second STA within the rTWT SP (see, Fig. 5, STA 504 receive latency-sensitive traffic from AP during granted TXOP within rTWT SP, par 0033, 0072-0073, 0076. Noted, low-latency STA may transmit latency-sensitive traffic to, or receive latency-sensitive traffic from an AP during the TXOP, par 0073. Noted, TXOP granted, par 0033).
In view of the above, it would have been obvious before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains to implement the method as taught by Ajami’192 into that of Hwang’121 modified by Kim’810 and Kim’810. The motivation would have been to provide adequate protection for latency-sensitive traffic in restricted TWT SP (par 0070).
Regarding claim 15, Hwang’121 modified by Kim’810 and Kim’810 discloses the method of claim 14 (see, Fig. 9, AP MLD communicates with STD MLD through multi-link operation by configuring through primary link, par 0121-0123).
The combination of Hwang’121, Kim’810 and Kim’810 discloses all the claim limitations but fails to explicitly teach:
wherein in response that the second backoff procedure is completed before a start time of the second TS, the second backoff procedure is performed again so that the second data frame is transmitted at or after the start time of the second TS.
However Ajami’192 from the same field of endeavor (see, Fig. 1, AP communicates with STAs in WLAN, par 0039) discloses:
wherein in response that the second backoff procedure (RBO countdown can be equated to second backoff procedure, par 0068) is completed (RBO countdown terminates can be equated to second backoff procedure is completed, 0068) before a start time of the second TS (TXOP can be equated to second TS, par 0068), the second backoff procedure is performed again (new RBO countdown can be equated to second backoff procedure is performed again, par 0068) so that the second data frame (traffic from AP for STA within TXOP can be equated to second data frame, par 0072-0073) is transmitted at or after the start time of the second TS (see, STA performs new RBO countdown to acquire TXOP for reception traffic from AP when RBO countdown terminates before TXOP in r-TWT SP, par 0068).
In view of the above, it would have been obvious before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains to implement the method as taught by Ajami’192 into that of Hwang’121 modified by Kim’810 and Kim’810. The motivation would have been to provide adequate protection for latency-sensitive traffic in restricted TWT SP (par 0070).
Regarding claim 16, Hwang’121 modified by Kim’810 and Kim’810 discloses the method of claim 13 (see, Fig. 9, AP MLD communicates with STD MLD through multi-link operation by configuring through primary link, par 0121-0123).
The combination of Hwang’121, Kim’810 and Kim’810 discloses all the claim limitations but fails to explicitly teach:
wherein in a procedure for the transmission to the second STA, a backoff counter value of the first backoff procedure is set to a new value, and a backoff counter value of the second backoff procedure is set to a remaining value in a procedure for the transmission to the first STA.
However Ajami’192 from the same field of endeavor (see, Fig. 1, AP communicates with STAs in WLAN, par 0039) discloses:
wherein in a procedure for the transmission to the second STA (Fig. 4A-4C, member STA of restricted TWT SP can be equated to second STA and restricted TWT SP for member STA can be equated to procedure for the transmission to the second STA, par 0060), a backoff counter value of the first backoff procedure is set to a new value (see, non-member STA without starting RBO countdown before start of restricted TWT SP required to reset RBO for RBO countdown at the start of each restricted TWT SP, par 0060, 0074), and a backoff counter value of the second backoff procedure is set to a remaining value in a procedure for the transmission to the first STA (see, non-member STA starting RBO countdown before start of restricted TWT SP continues to count down RBO, par 0060, 0074).
In view of the above, it would have been obvious before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains to implement the method as taught by Ajami’192 into that of Hwang’121 modified by Kim’810 and Kim’810. The motivation would have been to provide adequate protection for latency-sensitive traffic in restricted TWT SP (par 0070).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Xin et al (US20230047705A1, Pro 63260155 Priority Date: Aug 11, 2021) discloses:
after finishing all the scheduled traffic transmission during the R-TWT SP, the R-TWT scheduling AP can share the remaining time of the R-TWT SP for frame exchange with the STAs that are R-TWT scheduled STAs but not member STAs of that R-TWT (par 0015).
The Frame Control field indicates the type of the frame, and can indicate that this is an action frame. The Duration field contains NAV information used for CSMA/CA channel access. The Address 1 field contains the address of frame recipient. The Address 2 field contains the address of the STA that transmitted the frame. The Address 3 field contains the BSSID of the STA that is the recipient of the frame (0090).
During a R-TWTx SP, the R-TWT scheduling AP prioritizes, and/or only allows the transmission (i.e., frame exchange) of the scheduled traffic streams of R-TWTx. If the R-TWT scheduling AP finishes transmitting all the scheduled traffic streams of the R-TWTx with all the R-TWTx member STAs before the scheduled end time of the R-TWTx SP, it can use the remaining SP time to exchange frames with those STAs that are R-TWT scheduled STAs (0144).
The R-TWT scheduling AP can send: (a) a trigger frame to trigger TB PPDUs from those STAs; (b) DL PPDUs to those STAs; and/or (c) a trigger frame, such as MU-RTS TXS frame as defined in IEEE 802.11be, to launch a triggered TXOP sharing time that those STAs can use to transmit (par 0145).
TXOP for the frame exchange.
TXOP is not allowed to be reserved beyond the scheduled end time of the R-TWTx SP.
TXOP duration is required to be less-than-or-equal-to the scheduled R-TWTx SP time (scheduled end time of the R-TWTx SP-R-TWT scheduled start time of the R-TWTx SP)
TXOP that equals the NAV in the CTS frame (par 0171-0173).
This applies to claim 8 and 14.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to XUAN LU whose telephone number is (571)272-2844. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday - Friday 7:30am-5:30pm.
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, KWANG Yao can be reached on (571)272-3182. 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 https://ppair-my.uspto.gov/pair/PrivatePair. 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.
/XUAN LU/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2473