DETAILED ACTION
This Office Action is in response to the Applicants' communication filed on June 2, 2026. Claims 1-20 are currently pending and have been examined.
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 .
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed on June 2, 2026 have been fully considered.
Applicant argues in its Argument that cited arts fail to teach limitations of the independent Claim 1, specifically:
“a message indicating a type of the wireless device"
Examiner replies: In response to applicant’s argument that there is no teaching, suggestion, or motivation to combine the references, the examiner recognizes that obviousness may be established by combining or modifying the teachings of the prior art to produce the claimed invention where there is some teaching, suggestion, or motivation to do so found either in the references themselves or in the knowledge generally available to one of ordinary skill in the art. See In re Fine, 837 F.2d 1071, 5 USPQ2d 1596 (Fed. Cir. 1988), In re Jones, 958 F.2d 347, 21 USPQ2d 1941 (Fed. Cir. 1992), and KSR International Co. v. Teleflex, Inc., 550 U.S. 398, 82 USPQ2d 1385 (2007).
During patent examination, the pending claims must be given their broadest reasonable interpretation consistent with the specification. See MPEP § 2111. Further, although the claims are interpreted in light of the specification, limitations from the specification are not read into the claims. See In re Van Geuns, 988 F.2d 1181, 26 USPQ2d 1057 (Fed. Cir. 1993). See also MPEP § 2145(VI).
Regarding limitations the Claim 1 of the instant case, Choukir teaches in e.g., par. 41 and 50 that “Client properties 205 may define one or more services and/or policies that should be applied to wireless client 120 and any other information that may be used to identify or apply to wireless client 120, e.g., a type of wireless client 120 or the type of user using wireless client 120.”;
Applicant claims a two inductance component impedance matching network with each inductance be a variable inductor, where the matching network is "L” type.
Pinks teaches an automatic matching and tuning unit with LC based matching network operating at a frequency range of low and medium frequency bands (Fig. 1). The frequency adjustment is based on two L components 6 and 10 through the measurement feedbacks of sensors 2, 3 and 9.
Rhea merely illustrates well-known possible configurations for a two inductance matching network, where L-type is one of them. Choice of particular matching network is application specific as illustrated in Fig. 4 of Rhea. There is no teaching of Rhea or others on L-Type matching network are limited toward 100 MHz range.
DeWitz teaches an antenna tuning system with various matching networks such as LCL in Fig. 5, LL or LLC in Fig. 6, LL in Figs. 7-8, etc. where all inductors are variable. The ferromagnetic is adopted to achieve high frequency to make it operating at the widest possible frequency range, keep the physical dimensions and structure of antenna small for applications in aircraft and other installations, where it implies it may be used for air platform communication and/or navigation (DeWitz: Col. 1 lines 23-35).
Applicant has made arguments in many instances on low frequency vs. high frequency, low power vs. high power to conclude either on non-analogous arts and impermissible hindsight. There is no clear bound and limit for words of "low" and "high" and there are no clear claim limitations are given on frequency and power ranges in the claim set filed on 12/20/2013 and amended on 11/13/2015.
In response to applicant's argument that DeWitz is nonanalogous art, it has been held that a prior art reference must either be in the field of applicant’s endeavor or, if not, then be reasonably pertinent to the particular problem with which the applicant was concerned, in order to be relied upon as a basis for rejection of the claimed invention. See In re Oetiker, 977 F.2d 1443, 24 USPQ2d 1443 (Fed. Cir. 1992). In the instant case, both Pinks and DeWitz address similar problems in an analogous field. It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention was made to have modified Pinks with DeWitz with well-known matching network configurations as illustrated by Rhea to teach all elements of independent claim 1, as well as other independent claims 9, 18, 69, 77, 86, 89, 97, 106 and 109.
Therefore, it is reasonable to conclude that Wang as modified by Clevorn teaches all limitations as claimed.
Regarding limitations of Claims 1, 3, 4, 5, 7,11,12,13,14,18 and 20 of the instant case in view of the amended Claims and upon further consideration, a new ground(s) of rejection, necessitated by the amendments is made in view of different interpretation of the previously applied references and new prior art as presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
Examiner replies: Rejection of Claim 1 is maintained through reasons be given above. Regarding independent Claims 8 and 15, Claim 1 teaches all limitations of Claims 8 and 15. Claims 8 and 15 are rejected for the same reasons as in Claim 1. Since claims 2-7, 9-14 and 16 are depending on rejected claims 1, 8, and 15 respectively, rejections of Claims 2-7, 9-14 and 15 are also maintained.
Conclusion: Examiner has shown the rejections set forth in the Office Action of February 5, 2015 are proper. In light of amended Claims, new grounds of rejection are set forth below. Since the new grounds of rejection are necessitated by Applicant's amendments to the claims, the present action is made final.
Regarding limitations of Claims of the instant case in view of the amended Claims and upon further consideration, a new ground(s) of rejection, necessitated by the amendments is made in view of different interpretation of the previously applied references and new prior art as presented in this Office action. Therefore, Applicant’s arguments are moot. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
In view of the amended Claims and upon further consideration, a new ground(s) of rejection, necessitated by the amendments is made in view of different interpretation of the previously applied references and new prior art as presented in this Office action. Therefore, Applicant’s arguments are moot. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any extension fee pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ZHITONG CHEN whose telephone number is (571)270-1936. The examiner can normally be reached on M-F 9:30am - 5pm.
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, Yuwen Pan can be reached on 571-272-7855. 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 http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. 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.
/ZHITONG CHEN/
Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2649
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 of this title, 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.
Claims 1-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US 20210092021 A1 (Choukir), in view of US 20150223068 A1 (Thelen).
Regarding Claims 1, 11 and 16:
A method comprising: receiving, by an access point and from a wireless device, a message indicating a type of the wireless device; creating, based on the type of the wireless device, a virtual access point corresponding to the wireless device; causing the wireless device to connect to the virtual access point; determining whether the wireless device is connected to the virtual access point; and connecting the access point to the wireless device (Choukir: Figs. 1-3, a system configuration that comprise client device, APs, and system controller/server (e.g., WLC, DHCP server); Fig. 5 and par. 67-72, a procedure of onboarding of a client device, where the procedure is initiated by the client device in step 510, the system creates onboarding VNID (i.e., the VAP) in response to the request, after authentication, remap the client device to destination VNID (i.e., tear down onboarding “VAP” with final “AP”; par. 1, “the wireless client may change VLANs based on the type of services or policies that need to be applied. For example, a business may have different sets of services or policies that apply to different types of employees, contractors, and guests. Authentication may confirm which VLAN, which may be defined by a set of services and/or policies, the wireless client should use”, which indicates that the client request to be onboarding including “type” info).
Choukic does not teach explicitly on determining whether the wireless device is connected to the virtual access point; and connecting the access point to the wireless device. However, Thelen teaches (Thelen: e.g., par. 61, activity status may indicate that a guest device has logged into and is associated with a virtual access point; Figs. 2A-B, a onboarding process, where par. 46-50 further illustrate network administrator deice activities during onboarding process).
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention was made to modify Choukic with determining whether the wireless device is connected to the virtual access point; and connecting the access point to the wireless device as further taught by Thelen. The advantage of doing so is to provide an access for a client device onto a secure AP through a VAP without compromising the network security (Thelen: Bakground).
Regarding Claim 2, Choukic as modified further teaches:
The method of claim 1, wherein the message comprises information relating to security associated with the wireless device (Choukic: e.g., par. 20).
Regarding Claim 3, Choukic as modified further teaches:
The method of claim 1, further comprising: receiving, from the wireless device, information relating to security associated with the wireless device, wherein the creating the virtual access point further comprises creating, based on the information, the virtual access point (Choukic: e.g., par. 20, 42, dynamically create a new virtual network and VNID based on client properties 205; Thelen: e.g., par. 34, In response to the request, the network access point may create a virtual access point and virtual access point password based on the request and identifying information for the guest device).
Regarding Claim 4, Choukic as modified further teaches:
The method of claim 1, wherein the determining is based on a response message sent from the virtual access point to the wireless device (Thelen: e.g., par. 54, When the information received from the guest device does correspond to a virtual access point or matches information in a record of database of authorized guest devices (e.g., a correct virtual access point password correlated device ID) (i.e., determination block 244="Yes"), access to a virtual access point 210a, which may be established or instantiated on the network access point 210, may be granted to the guest device 220 by sending an access granted message 217a).
Regarding Claims 5, Choukic as modified further teaches:
The method of claim 1, further comprising receiving, from a computing device, information relating to the virtual access point, wherein the information comprises a service set identifier of the virtual access point (Thelen: e.g. par. 38, Additionally, the virtual access point may have its own identifier, such as an unpublished SSID or indexed SSID, that the guest device must use when accessing the network with the virtual access point password; request may be forwarded or unilaterally "pushed" by the network administrator device to the network access point).
Regarding Claim 6, Choukic as modified further teaches:
The method of claim 1, further comprising destroying, after creating the virtual access point, the virtual access point, wherein the destroying the virtual access point is based on receiving no additional messages from at least one wireless device for a pre-determined amount of time (Thelen: par. 84-85, the network access point may terminate a virtual access point when all guests associated with the virtual access point have been idle for a period of time, and may terminate the virtual access points when no guests associated with a virtual access point have logged in for a period of time).
Regarding Claim 7, Choukic as modified further teaches:
The method of claim 1, further comprising determining, based on a media access control address of the wireless device, whether to allow the wireless device to connect to the virtual access point (Thelen: par. 35-36, device identifier may be bound with the virtual access point password; by limiting network access to guests entering an approved virtual access point password from a guest device having a device identifier unique to the approved guest device (i.e., MAC address)).
Regarding Claim 8, Choukic as modified further teaches:
The method of claim 1, further comprising receiving, from a computing device, at least one media access control address of at least one wireless device (Thelen: e.g., Fig. 3B and par. 69-70).
Regarding Claim 9, Choukic as modified further teaches:
The method of claim 1, the connecting is based on receiving, from the wireless device, information associated with the access point (Thelen: e.g., par. 39. The guest device may enter the virtual access point identifier and the virtual access point password during a login or access procedure with the network access point).
Regarding Claim 10, Choukic as modified further teaches:
The method of claim 1, wherein the message further comprises information relating to at least one parameter of the wireless device (Choukic: e.g., par. 41, Client properties 205 may define one or more services and/or policies that should be applied to wireless client 120 and any other information that may be used to identify or apply to wireless client 120, e.g., a type of wireless client 120 or the type of user using wireless client 120).
Regarding Claim 12, Choukic as modified further teaches:
The method of claim 11, wherein the information associated with the access point comprises a service set identifier and a password of the access point (Thelen: par. 38, the virtual access point may have its own identifier, such as an unpublished SSID, and the virtual access point password)
Regarding Claim 13, Choukic as modified further teaches:
The method of claim 11, wherein the at least one message comprises a media access control address of the wireless device (Thelen: par. 56., device ID for the guet 220 may include a MAC address or identifier)..
Regarding Claim 14, Choukic as modified further teaches:
The method of claim 11, wherein the information relating to at least on parameter of the wireless device comprises credential information associated with the wireless device (Choukic: e.g., par. 39, authenticate itself using one ore more credentials 204 that identifies an authorized user and/or class of users).
Regarding Claim 15, Choukic as modified further teaches:
The method of claim 11, further comprising disconnecting, after receiving the information associated with the access point, from the virtual access point (Choukic: e.g., par. 43, VNID handler 117 may remove the association of wireless client 120 and/or its assigned IP address from onboarding VNID 105A and create a new association of wireless client 120….to the destination).
Regarding Claim 17, Choukic as modified further teaches:
The method of claim 16, wherein the information associated with the access point comprises a service set identifier and a password of the access point (Thelen: e.g., par. 38, virtual access point identifier [such as an unpublished SSID] and the virtual access point password).
Regarding Claim 18, Choukic as modified further teaches:
The method of claim 16, further comprising sending, by the computing device and to the access point, information relating to parameters of at least one virtual access point, wherein the information relating to the parameters of the virtual access point comprises a service set identifier of the at least one virtual access point (Thelen: e.g., par. 38, 50, network adm 230 may provide info 235….to the network access point 210; VIP ID and VAP password may be stored along the contact info pass in the info 235).
Regarding Claim 19, Choukic as modified further teaches:
19. The method of claim 16, further comprising establishing a secure connection for communication with the wireless device (Thelen: e.g., par. 44, a secure connect may be established between the guest device 120 and the network through the network access point 110).
Regarding Claim 20, Choukic as modified further teaches:
The method of claim 16, further comprising receiving, from the access point, an acknowledgment message, based on sending information relating to parameters of at least one virtual access point (Thelen: e.g., par. 38, 83-85, when the VAP is instantiated or established, the network AP may forward the VAP ID and VAP password to the network adm device).
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any extension fee pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ZHITONG CHEN whose telephone number is (571)270-1936. The examiner can normally be reached on M-F 9:30am - 5pm.
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, Yuwen Pan can be reached on 571-272-7855. 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 http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. 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.
/ZHITONG CHEN/
Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2649
Prosecution Insights