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
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.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claims 1-3, 11-13, 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over document CN 109699065A (hereinafter simply referred to as document’065; English translation also provided) in view of document CN 111246557B (hereinafter simply referred to as document’557; English translation also provided).
As to claim 1, document’065 discloses a method comprising: receiving, by a smart device 11 (see figure 1), a first signal (see “response signal” in paragraph [0025]) from a station 12 in connection with the smart device 11; determining, by the smart device 11 and based on the received first signal, signal strength of the received first signal (see paragraph [0025] which discloses “the strength range to which the signal strength of the response signal belongs is determined”; paragraph [0085] which discloses “After receiving the response signal, the smart switch determines the signal strength of the response signal”); selecting, by the smart device 11 and based on the signal strength, a signal strength range from a plurality of signal strength ranges (see paragraph [0025] which discloses “the strength range to which the signal strength of the response signal belongs is determined”; paragraph [0105] which discloses “In this step, the signal strength range to which the current response signal belongs is determined based on multiple preset signal strength ranges”); determining, by the smart device 11 and based on a mapping between the plurality of signal strength ranges and a plurality of transmit powers, a transmit power corresponding to the selected signal strength range (see paragraph [0025] which discloses “the strength range to which the signal strength of the response signal belongs is determined, and the transmission power of the next interrogation signal is determined according to the correspondence between preset signal strength range and the transmission power of the interrogation signal”); and transmitting, by the smart device 11 and based on the determined transmit power, a second signal to the station 12 (see paragraph [0026] which discloses “the transmission power of the next interrogation signal”; paragraph [0107] which discloses “and the transmission power is used as the transmission power of the next interrogation signal”).
Document’065 fails to disclose that the smart device 11 is an access point AP. Document’557 discloses that a smart device is an access point AP (see paragraph [0047] which discloses “the second smart device is in access point (AP) mode (hereinafter referred to as an AP)”). Therefore, it would have been obvious, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to one of ordinary skill in the art to provide the above teaching of document’557 to document’065, such that the smart device 11 is an access point, in order to enhance network performance by extending Wi-Fi coverage.
As to claims 2, 12, document’065 discloses transmitting the second signal to the station 12 comprises: determining that the second signal received by the station does not meet sensitivity requirements; increasing the determined transmit power; and retransmitting, based on the increased transmit power, the second signal to the station. See paragraphs [0028], [0110], [0115].
As to claims 3, 13, the combination of document’065 and document’557 fails to disclose determining that the station has moved relative to the AP; and adjusting the determined transmit power based on a movement of the station. The examiner, however, takes Official Notice that such a teaching is known in the art. Therefore, it would have been obvious, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the combination of document’065 and document’557 as claimed, in order to yield predictable results such as ensuring transmitting signal to properly reach the station.
As to claim 11, it is rejected for similar reasons with respect to independent claim 1 as set forth above. In addition, document’065 discloses at least one processor; a memory coupled to the at least one processor. See paragraph [0152] which discloses “This application also provides a computer-readable storage medium storing a computer program thereon, which, when executed by a processor, implements the power adjustment method provided by any of the foregoing schemes”.
As to claim 20, it is rejected for similar reasons with respect to independent claim 1 as set forth above. In addition, document’065 discloses a non-transitory computer-readable medium. See paragraph [0152] which discloses “This application also provides a computer-readable storage medium storing a computer program thereon, which, when executed by a processor, implements the power adjustment method provided by any of the foregoing schemes”.
Claims 4, 14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over document’065 in view of document’557 as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of document CN 116346251A (hereinafter simply referred to as document’251; English translation also provided).
As to claims 4, 14, the combination of document’065 and document’557 fails to disclose performing performance tests for the plurality of signal strength ranges by using a set of transmit powers; and determining, based on the performance tests, a mapping between the plurality of signal strength ranges and the plurality of transmit powers of the set of transmit powers. Document’251 discloses disclose performing performance tests for the plurality of signal strength ranges by using a set of transmit powers; and determining, based on the performance tests, a mapping between the plurality of signal strength ranges and the plurality of transmit powers of the set of transmit powers. See paragraph [0038]. Therefore, it would have been obvious, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to one of ordinary skill in the art to provide the above teaching of document’251 to the combination of document’065 and document’557 as claimed, in order to improve network performance.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 5-10, 15-19 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
As to claims 5-10, 15-19, the prior art of record fail to disclose determining that no station is connected to the AP; and waiting for a connection from a new station by using a standby mode of the AP, a single chain being used and a channel width and an Ethernet speed being reduced in the standby mode.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Kimura (US 2015/0201386) discloses controlling transmission power in communication system.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to NGUYEN THANH VO whose telephone number is (571)272-7901. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri 8-5.
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, Jeanette J Parker can be reached at (571) 270-3647. 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.
/NGUYEN T VO/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2646