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 .
Information Disclosure Statement (IDS)
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 16 April 2024, 18 November 2024, 29 July 2025 and 10 April 2026 is being considered by the examiner.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments, see Remark, filed 09 June 2026, with respect to the rejection(s) of claim(s) under 35 U.S.C 103 as being unpatentable over Cariou et al. in view of Asterjadhi et al. have been fully considered and are persuasive. Therefore, the rejection has been withdrawn. However, upon further consideration, a new ground(s) of rejection is made in view of KIM et al.
Claims 1-20 are pending.
Figure 4 of the application illustrates the claimed invention.
PNG
media_image1.png
485
799
media_image1.png
Greyscale
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.
Claim(s) 1-3, 6-8, 9, 11-15 and 17-19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Cariou et al. (US 2023/0292245 A1) in view of Asterjadhi et al. (US 2024/0137860 A1), further in view of KIM et al. (US 2023/0224814 A1).
Regarding claims 1 and 12, Cariou et al. discloses an access point (AP) device associated with a non-AP device in a wireless network, the AP device comprising:
at least one AP affiliated with the AP device;
a processor coupled to the at least one AP, the processor configured to:
establish one or more links between the AP device and the non-AP device,
generate a frame indicating the at least one link and indicating whether the at least one link is reconfigurable as a non-PS link; and
transmit the frame to the non-AP device (“a methods, and device related to initial power state. A device may identify a request frame received from a non-AP MLD on a first link of a plurality of links, wherein the non-AP MLD comprises a plurality of station devices (STAs), and wherein the first link is associated with a first STA of the plurality of STAs. The device may cause to send a response frame to the non-AP MLD on the first link to establish the plurality of links between the device and the non-AP MLD. The device may determine, based on the request frame, a power save mode associated with each of the STAs of the non-AP MLD. The device may communicate with the non-AP MLD based on the power save mode.”) see Abstract.
PNG
media_image2.png
458
675
media_image2.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image3.png
675
609
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Cariou et al. fails to teach wherein at least one link is a power save (PS) link that switches between a light PS mode and a non-PS mode.
Asterjadhi et al. in the same field of invention, teaches this feature.
([0059]: “At 521, an STA 512 of the non-AP MLD 510 may transmit a request to transition from a lower power mode (for example, “light sleep” (LS) mode) to a higher power mode (for example, “active’ mode) to an AP 522 of the AP MLD 520.”).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to those having ordinary skills in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine Asterjadhi et al. with Cariou et al. for switching between a power save mode and non-PS mode.
Cariou et al. in view of Asterjadhi et al. fails to teach indicating whether the at least one link is reconfigurable as a non-PS link.
KIM et al. in the same field of invention, teach this feature.
PNG
media_image4.png
478
778
media_image4.png
Greyscale
KIM et al. teaches (“In a wireless local area network system, a transmission MLD may comprise a first station (STA) and a second STA, wherein the first STA operates on a first link and the second STA operates on a second link. The transmission MLD may transmit, to a reception MLD, capability information regarding whether power saving is supported.” See Abstract.), ([0491]: “a multi-link device (MLD) may operate in a power save mode independently for each link. In other words, some STAs (for example, the first STA) of the MLD may operate in a doze state and a link may operate in a disable state due to the power save mode. Some other STAs (for example, the second STA) may operate in the awake state of the power save mode or the non-power save mode. For example, some other STAs (for example, the second STA) may operate in an available state, and a link may operate in an enable state.”)
Therefore, it would have been obvious to those having ordinary skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to implement in Cariou et al. an indication indicating one or more links in the MLD device are capable of operate in an awake state of the power save mode or the non-power save mode, such as teaching in KIM et al.
Regarding claim 2, Cariou et al. teaches wherein the AP device comprises at least two APs affiliated with the AP device, wherein the processor is configured to:
establish at least two links between the AP device and the non-AP device; and wherein the frame indicates that each link operates as a power save (PS) link or a non-PS link.
([0032]: “an initial power state system may facilitate that when a link is enabled for a STA that is part of a non-AP MLD through signaling (multi-link setup/association or TID to link mapping update) the system may send, on another link, the initial power management mode of the STA. The MLD system may send the initial power management mode of the STA immediately after the exchange, when the link is in a power save mode, and its power state is in a doze state. It should be understood that a power management (PM) bit may be set in a frame to indicate whether a device is in an active mode or in a power save mode. For example, if PM bit is set to 0, it indicates that the device is always awake (awake state). However, if the PM bit is set to 1, this indicates that the device is in a power save mode. The power save mode may be awake state or doze state. Therefore, it is important to determine what state a device is in order to be able to communicate with that device. It should be understood that a device may be one of the logical devices (STAs) within a non-AP MLD.”). See figure 2.
Regarding claims 3 and 13, Asterjadhi et al. further teaches wherein a first AP that has established a first link operating (anchor link) as the non-PS link is in awake state, and a second AP that has established a second link (auxiliary links) operating as the PS link alternates between the light PS mode and the non-PS mode, the first link being established between the first AP and a first station (STA) affiliated with the non-AP device, the second link being established between the second AP and a second STA affiliated with the non-AP device. ([0060]: “at 525, the STA 512 may transmit a request on an anchor link 502 associated with another AP 524 of the AP MLD 520. The anchor link may be enabled when the request is transmitted. The AP may save power on a subset of links while leaving only one link (for example, anchor link) in the higher power mode.”), see figures 4 and 5.
PNG
media_image5.png
876
610
media_image5.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image6.png
400
615
media_image6.png
Greyscale
Regarding claims 6 and 15, Asterjadhi et al. further teaches wherein the processor is further configured to:
receive a request frame, from the non-AP device, requesting reconfiguration for non-PS link and PS link on at least one link between the AP device and the non-AP device; and
in response to the request frame, transmit a response frame, to the non-AP device, indicating reconfiguration for non-PS link and PS link on the at least one link between the AP device and the non-AP device. See figure 5, “Transmit a request to transition from a lower power mode to a higher power mode, step 521.”).
Regarding claims 7 and 18, Asterjadhi et al. teaches wherein a primary channel of a link operating as non-PS link is the same as a primary channel of a link operating as non-PS link in a neighboring AP device. ([0060]: “The AP may save power on a subset of links while leaving only one link (for example, anchor link) in the higher power mode.”). a primary channel of an anchor link.
Regarding claims 8 and 19, Asterjadhi et al. further teaches wherein a primary channel of a link operating as non-PS link is a part of the operational bandwidth of a link operating as non-PS link in a neighboring AP device. (see figure 4), ([0082]: “the request for the AP to transition from operating in the lower power mode to operating in the higher power mode indicates parameters for transmitting data in the higher power mode including at least one or more of: the bandwidth available on the link associated with the AP”).
Regarding claims 11 and 17, Asterjadhi et al. teaches wherein multi-AP coordination traffic is communicated on a link operating as non-PS link.
([0060]: “at 525, the STA 512 may transmit a request on an anchor link 502 associated with another AP 524 of the AP MLD 520. The anchor link may be enabled when the request is transmitted. The AP may save power on a subset of links while leaving only one link (for example, anchor link) in the higher power mode.”). In other words, the anchor link operating as non-PS link for transmitting coordination traffic.
Regarding claim 14, Asterjahi et al. teaches wherein the non-PS link is in awake state and the PS link alternates between the light PS mode and the non-PS mode.
([0059]: “At 521, an STA 512 of the non-AP MLD 510 may transmit a request to transition from a lower power mode (for example, “light sleep” (LS) mode) to a higher power mode (for example, “active’ mode) to an AP 522 of the AP MLD 520.”).
Regarding claim 17, Asterjadhi et al. teaches wherein the processor is further configured to;
transmit a request frame to the AP device requesting reconfiguration for non-PS link and PS link on at least one link between the non-AP device and the AP device; and
receive a response frame from the AP device indicating reconfiguration for non-PS link and PS link on the at least one link between the non-AP device and the AP device. (“the processor causes the device to transmit (8020 a request for a wireless access point (AP) to transition from operating in a lower power mode to operate in a higher power mode in which a link associated with the AP is enabled for the wireless station (STA) to a wireless AP multi-link device (MLD). The processor receives (804) a response associated with a request after a transition delay period, and transmits (806) data to the AP MLD on the link after the delay period. The AP is dozed on the lik when the link is disabled, and the AP is active on the link when the link is enabled. The request for the AP to transition from operating in the lower power mode to operating in the higher power mode corresponds to the media access control (MAC) protocol data unit (MPDU) individually addressed to the AP.”), see Abstract and See figure 5.
PNG
media_image7.png
815
656
media_image7.png
Greyscale
Claim(s) 4 and 15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Cariou et al. (US 2023/0292245 A1) in view of Asterjadhi et al. (US 11,510,269 B2) further in view of further in view of KIM et al. (US 2023/0224814 A1).
Regarding claims 4 and 15, Cariou et al. fails teaches wherein the processor is further configured to cause the first AP to transmit information for the second STA to the first STA via the first link when the second AP is in doze state in the second link.
Asterjadhi et al. (US 11,510,269 B2) teaches (“In some implementations, activating the second link includes deactivating the first link by causing the first STA interface to enter a doze state, switching one more antennas from a first connection to the first STA interface, and causing the second STA interface to enter the awake state for multi-input-multiple-output (MIMO) communication using multiple antennas including the one or more antennas.” See col. 3, lines 60-67.).
PNG
media_image8.png
486
725
media_image8.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image9.png
725
843
media_image9.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image10.png
897
567
media_image10.png
Greyscale
to Therefore, it would have been obvious those having ordinary skills in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to activate an auxiliary link for transmitting data when a primary link is in doze state.
Claim(s) 5 and 16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Cariou et al. (US 2023/0292245 A1) in view of Asterjadhi et al. (US 11,510,269 B2) further in view of, KIM et al. (US 2023/0224814 A1), furthermore in view of Fang et al. (US 2022/0361193 A1).
Regarding claims 5 and 16, Asterjadhi et al. (US 11,510,269 B2) further teaches wherein the processor is further configured to cause the first AP to communicate latency sensitive traffic for the second STA with the first STA via the first link when the second AP is in doze state in the second link.
(“activating the second link includes deactivating the first link by causing the first STA interface to enter a doze state, switching one or more antennas from a first connection to the first STA interface to a second connection to the second STA interface, and causing the second STA interface to enter the awake state”, see col. 3, lines 60-65); and the disclosure of Fang et al. (“wirelessly receiving a priority access parameter set corresponding to an enabled link from the AP; and configuring the priority channel access service on the enabled link for priority communication with the AP according to the priority access parameter set”’ and “this priority channel access service comprises a national security and emergency preparedness (NSEP) priority access service, and further comprising deriving NSEP priority values from the priority access parameter set corresponding to an enabled link”, see claims 1-2 and figure 3).
PNG
media_image11.png
823
711
media_image11.png
Greyscale
Therefore, it would have been obvious to those having ordinary skills in the art at before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine Fang et al. with Cariou et al. in view of Asterjadhi et al. for performing priority service access between non-AP STAs or MLD using EDCA or UORA parameter sets corresponding to enabled links that can be used to derive priority access (e.g., contention window) information of enabled links for NSEP or LL wireless communication.
Claim(s) 9 and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Cariou et al. (US 2023/0292245 A1) in view of Asterjadhi et al. (US 2024/0137860 A1) further in view of KIM et al. (US 2023/0224814 A1) and further in view of Shafin et al. (US 2022/0408367 A1).
Regarding claims 9 and 20, Cariou et al. in view of Asterjadhi et al. wherein latency sensitive traffic or emergency preparedness communication service (EPCS) traffic is communicated on a link operating as non-PS link.
Shafin et al. in the same field of invention, teaches this feature.
([0084]: “in reference to FIG. 3A, if STA3 has some pending latency sensitive traffic for its TDLS peer STA (STA1), then the non-AP MLD (MLD.sub.R) can send a notification frame (e.g. a TDLS Transmission Start Notification frame) to notify about the impending TDLS transmission by STA3 so that AP2 can terminate any ongoing downlink transmission to STA4 before the transmission starts over the TDLS direct link.”). See figure 3.
PNG
media_image12.png
486
860
media_image12.png
Greyscale
It would have been obvious to those having ordinary skills in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to establish a TDLS direct link for transmitting sensitive traffic.
Claim(s) 10 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Cariou et al. (US 2023/0292245 A1) in view of Asterjadhi et al. (US 2024/0137860 A1) further in view of Ryu et al. (US 2024/0422674 A1).
Regarding claim 10, Cariou et al. in view of Asterjadhi et al. fails to teach
wherein latency sensitive traffic is communicated on a link operating as a PS link when latency requirements of the latency sensitive traffic are met on the PS link.
Ryu et al. in the same field of invention, teaches this feature.
([0154]: “changing the power management mode from the first power save mode to the second power save mode may be in response to receiving the downlink Bus comprising at least one latency sensitive BU at the non-AP MLD. The latency sensitive BU may be indicated as a specific TID by the AP MLD or identified as one or more specific access categories.”), see figure 21.
PNG
media_image13.png
631
950
media_image13.png
Greyscale
Therefore, it would have been obvious to those having ordinary skills in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to implement teaching in Ryu et al. so for transmitting sensitive traffic in power saving mode.
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant disclosure:
Kwon et al. (US 2011/0225440 A1) teaches ([0262]: “The controller 1520 may be configured to indicate to the access point that the terminal is capable of operating in the power saving mode. For example, the controller 1520 may set one or more bits of a capability element of a VHT control frame to indicate a power management mode of the terminal 1500. For example, referring again to FIG. 1, the VHT control frame may be used to indicate whether the terminal 1500 is capable of operating in the non-power save (non-PS) TXOP mode 130, in which the terminal remains continuously awake, a power save (PS) TXOP mode in 140 which the terminal may switch from an awake state to a doze state in which the terminal sleeps, and a power save mode 120 in which the terminal continuously sleeps.”).
PARK et al. (US 2021/0120612 A1) discloses devices related to association identification (AID) re-assignment. A device may perform an association with a station multi-link device (STA MLD), herein the STA MLD comprises one or more logical entities defining separate station devices. The device may assign a first AID to the STA MLD. The device may establish one or more links with the STA MLD. The device may cause to send an indication of an assignment of a second AID to the STA MLD. The device may communicate with the STA MLD using the second AID.
Conclusion
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).
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 nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) 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 BRENDA H PHAM whose telephone number is (571)272-3135. The examiner can normally be reached 571-272-3135.
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, Charles Jiang can be reached at 571-270-7191. 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.
BRENDA H. PHAM
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 2412
/BRENDA H PHAM/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2412
Prosecution Insights