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 .
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 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.
Claim(s) 1-3, 5, 7-9, 13-15, 17 and 19-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yongho Seok et al. (Multi-link triggered uplink Access Follow Up, IEEE 802.11-20/0671r3, July 29, 2020, MediaTek Inc., hereinafter “D1”) in view of Han et al. (EP 3579467A1, hereinafter “Han”).
Regarding claims 1, 8 and 13, D1 discloses a method of an access point multi-link device (AP MLD), the method comprising: transmitting a first trigger frame on a first link; transmitting a second trigger frame on a second link (see slide 11, Trigger frame on two different links); receiving a first data frame triggered by the first trigger frame on the first link (see slide 11, PPDU on 6 GHz link); receiving a second data frame triggered by the second trigger frame on the second link (see slide 11, PPDU on 5 GHz link); transmitting a first reception response frame in response to the first data frame on the first link (see slide 11, Block Ack on 6 GHz link) ; and transmitting a second reception response frame in response to the second data frame on the second link (see slide 11, Block Ack on 5 Ghz link), wherein transmission of the first reception response frame and transmission of the second reception response frame are synchronized (see slide 11, the Block Acks are transmitted in both links within a time difference less than (aSIFSTime + aSignal Extension)/2, i.e. synchronized). D1 discloses all the subject matter but fails to mention wherein the first reception response frame and second reception response frame have the same length. However, Han from a similar field of endeavor discloses wherein the first reception response frame and second reception response frame have the same length (see para. 0048, response frame on different channels with same length). Thus, it would have been obvious to one ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention was made to include Han response frame scheme into D1 response frame. The method can be implemented in a response frame. The motivation of doing this is to avoid interference.
Regarding claims 2, and 14, D1 discloses wherein the first trigger frame and the second trigger frame are transmitted simultaneously, and each of the first trigger frame and the second trigger frame triggers orthogonal frequency division multiple access (OFDMA) transmission (see slide 3, frequency segments).
Regarding claims 3, and 15, D1 discloses all the subject matter but fails to mention wherein the first trigger frame requests information on a first length of the first reception response frame, and the second trigger frame requests information on a second length of the second reception response frame. However, Han from a similar field of endeavor discloses wherein the first trigger frame requests information on a first length of the first reception response frame, and the second trigger frame requests information on a second length of the second reception response frame (see para. 0048, request frame with length indication information). Thus, it would have been obvious to one ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention was made to include Han response frame scheme into D1 response frame. The method can be implemented in a response frame. The motivation of doing this is to avoid interference.
Regarding claims 5, 17 and 20, D1 discloses all the subject matter but fails to mention wherein the first data frame includes information on a first length of the first reception response frame, and wherein the second data frame includes information on a second length of the second reception response frame. However, Han from a similar field of endeavor discloses wherein the first data frame includes information on a first length of the first reception response frame, and wherein the second data frame includes information on a second length of the second reception response frame (see para. 0048, length indication information of response frame). Thus, it would have been obvious to one ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention was made to include Han response frame scheme into D1 response frame. The method can be implemented in a response frame. The motivation of doing this is to avoid interference.
Regarding claims 7 and 19, D1 discloses wherein the first reception response frame is transmitted together with a third trigger frame triggering transmission of a third data frame on the first link, the second reception response frame is transmitted together with a fourth trigger frame triggering transmission of a fourth data frame on the second link, and an end time of the third trigger frame and an end time of the fourth trigger frame are synchronized.(see slide 11, UL Length subfield values in the trigger frames shall be set to ensure the ending times of the solicited TB PPDU is less than or equal to (aSIFSTime + aSignalExtension)/2).
Regarding claim 9, D1 discloses wherein each of the first trigger frame and the second trigger frame triggers orthogonal frequency division multiple access (OFDMA) transmission (see slide 3, frequency segments). D1 discloses all the subject matter but fails to mention wherein the first trigger frame requests information on the first length of the first reception response frame, and the second trigger frame requests information on the second length of the first reception response frame. However, Han from a similar field of endeavor discloses wherein the first trigger frame requests information on the first length of the first reception response frame, and the second trigger frame requests information on the second length of the first reception response frame (see para. 0048, length indication information of response frame). Thus, it would have been obvious to one ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention was made to include Han response frame scheme into D1 response frame. The method can be implemented in a response frame. The motivation of doing this is to avoid interference.
Claim(s) 4, 6, 10-12, 16 and 18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over D1 in view of Han as applied to claims 1, 3, 8, 9, 13, and 15 above, and further in view Alfred Asterjadhi (Proposed Resolutions to CIDs specified in 11-12/2180r0, IEEE802.11-21/0915r0, 12-01-2020, hereinafter “D2”).
Regarding claims 4, 10, 16, D1 and Han disclose all the subject matter but fails to mention wherein each of the first trigger frame and the second trigger frame includes a single response scheduling (SRS) indication message requesting information on a length, and the SRS indication message includes at least one of an SRS request indicator field, a response type field, an indication type field, or an estimated next trigger frame (TF) size field. However, D2 from a similar field of endeavor discloses wherein each of the first trigger frame and the second trigger frame includes a single response scheduling (SRS) indication message requesting information on a length, and the SRS indication message includes at least one of an SRS request indicator field, a response type field, an indication type field, or an estimated next trigger frame (TF) size field (see page 41, when more than one station that are affiliated with the same NSTR non-AP MLD simultaneously transmit a PPDU to their peer APs that are affiliated with the same AP MLD that sets the SRS support subfield in the Basic variant Multi-link element it transmits to 1 solicit a control response frame on more than one link and the NSTR non-AP MLD intends to align PPDU end time of PPDU carrying the control response frame from the peer APs, then PPDU soliciting the control response frame shall carry one or more MPDUs with SRS control subfield . The station shall set the PPDU response duration subfield of the SRS control subfield a value that to or longer than maximum of the expected duration of the response PPDUs on all links, where the expected duration of the response is calculated based on the following parameters, thus the response duration of same value on all links). Thus, it would have been obvious to one ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention was made o include D2 alignment scheme into D1 response frame. The method can be implemented in a response frame. The motivation of doing this is to avoid interference.
Regarding claims 6, 11, and 18, D1 and Han disclose all the subject matter but fails to mention wherein the generating of the first reception response frame and the second reception response frame having the same length comprises: identifying a first length of the first reception response frame indicated by the first data frame; identifying a second length of the second reception response frame indicated by the second data frame; determining a longer length among the first length and the second length as the same length of the first reception response frame and the second reception response frame; and generating the first reception response frame and the second reception response frame having the determined same length, wherein the first length is based on a number of medium access control (MAC) layer protocol data units (MPDUs) included in the first data frame. However, D2 from a similar field of endeavor discloses wherein the generating of the first reception response frame and the second reception response frame having the same length comprises: identifying a first length of the first reception response frame indicated by the first data frame; identifying a second length of the second reception response frame indicated by the second data frame; determining a longer length among the first length and the second length as the same length of the first reception response frame and the second reception response frame; and generating the first reception response frame and the second reception response frame having the determined same length, wherein the first length is based on a number of medium access control (MAC) layer protocol data units (MPDUs) included in the first data frame field (see page 41, when more than one station that are affiliated with the same NSTR non-AP MLD simultaneously transmit a PPDU to their peer APs that are affiliated with the same AP MLD that sets the SRS support subfield in the Basic variant Multi-link element it transmits to 1 solicit a control response frame on more than one link and the NSTR non-AP MLD intends to align PPDU end time of PPDU carrying the control response frame from the peer APs, then PPDU soliciting the control response frame shall carry one or more MPDUs with SRS control subfield . The station shall set the PPDU response duration subfield of the SRS control subfield a value that to or longer than maximum of the expected duration of the response PPDUs on all links, where the expected duration of the response is calculated based on the following parameters, thus the response duration of same value on all links). Thus, it would have been obvious to one ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention was made o include D2 alignment scheme into D1 response frame. The method can be implemented in a response frame. The motivation of doing this is to avoid interference.
Regarding claim 12, D1 and Han disclose all the subject matter but fails to mention wherein a longer length among the first length and the second length is determined as same length of the first reception response frame and the second reception response frame. However, D2 from a similar field of endeavor discloses wherein a longer length among the first length and the second length is determined as same length of the first reception response frame and the second reception response frame (see page 41, when more than one station that are affiliated with the same NSTR non-AP MLD simultaneously transmit a PPDU to their peer APs that are affiliated with the same AP MLD that sets the SRS support subfield in the Basic variant Multi-link element it transmits to 1 solicit a control response frame on more than one link and the NSTR non-AP MLD intends to align PPDU end time of PPDU carrying the control response frame from the peer APs, then PPDU soliciting the control response frame shall carry one or more MPDUs with SRS control subfield . The station shall set the PPDU response duration subfield of the SRS control subfield a value that to or longer than maximum of the expected duration of the response PPDUs on all links, where the expected duration of the response is calculated based on the following parameters, thus the response duration of same value on all links). Thus, it would have been obvious to one ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention was made o include D2 alignment scheme into D1 response frame. The method can be implemented in a response frame. The motivation of doing this is to avoid interference.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MOHAMMAD S ANWAR whose telephone number is (571)270-5641. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 6-5 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, Asad Nawaz can be reached at 571-272-3988. 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.
MOHAMMAD S. ANWAR
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 2463
/MOHAMMAD S ANWAR/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2463
Prosecution Insights