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 .
Specification
The title of the invention is not descriptive. A new title is required that is clearly indicative of the invention to which the claims are directed.
Claim Objections
Claim 1 is objected to because of the following informalities: the recitation of “a method of method” is objected to. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 23 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Viger et al (US 2022/04408409). Hereinafter referred to as Viger.
Regarding claims 1 and 23. Viger discloses a method of method of dynamic channel switching by a station (STA), comprising: receiving a resource unit (RU) allocation in an initial frame exchange (see at least abstract and paragraph [0017]); determining that the STA cannot operate in its operating BW covering a primary channel based upon the RU allocation (see at least paragraphs [0195]); switching to secondary channel(s) per an RU allocated to it to carry out communication by the STA during a transmit opportunity (TXOP) (see at least paragraph [0197]); carrying out the communication during the TXOP (see at least paragraph [0197]); and switching back to the primary channel no later than an end of the TXOP if detecting that an AP will not do the initial frame exchange with it in the secondary channel(s) within the TXOP (see at least paragraphs [0197]).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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 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.
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.
Claims 1, 5-6, 10, 13, 19-20 and 23 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Li et al (US 2023/0232452, hereinafter referred to as Li) in view of Viger.
Regarding claims 1 and 23. Li discloses A method of method of dynamic channel switching by a station (STA), comprising determining that the STA cannot operate in its operating BW covering a primary channel based upon the RU allocation (see at least paragraphs [0126] and [0136]); switching to secondary channel(s) per an RU allocated to it to carry out communication by the STA during a transmit opportunity (TXOP) (see at least paragraphs [0132] ); carrying out the communication during the TXOP; and switching back to the primary channel no later than an end of the TXOP if detecting that an AP will not do the initial frame exchange with it in the secondary channel(s) within the TXOP (see at least paragraphs [0135]-[0136]).
Li discloses all the limitations of the claimed invention with the exception of receiving a resource unit (RU) allocation in an initial frame exchange, However, Viger, from the same field of endeavor, teaches receiving a resource unit (RU) allocation in an initial frame exchange (see at least abstract and paragraph [0017]). Thus, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the time of the invention to employ the teaching of Viger, as indicated, into the communication method of Li for the purpose of managing resources and establishing communication.
Regarding claim 5. Li in view of Viger discloses a method wherein STA carries out a dynamic channel switch when the STAs operating bandwidth is narrower than a basic service set bandwidth (see at least paragraph [0157]).
Regarding claim 6. Li in view of Viger discloses a method wherein the STA has a bandwidth associated with a basic network allocation vector (NAV) timer (see at least paragraphs [0010] and [0136]).
Regarding claim 10. Li in view of Viger discloses a method further comprising carrying out a dynamic channel puncture during the initial frame exchange that solicits the dynamic channel switching (see at least paragraphs [0135]-[0136]).
Regarding claim 13. Li in view of Viger discloses a method wherein the initial frame exchange uses a multi-user request to send message to solicit CTS as the initial frame exchange to initiate a dynamic channel switch (see at least, abstract, figure 1 and paragraph [0136] and [0148]).
Regarding claim 19. Li in view of Viger discloses a method wherein the STA switches back to the primary channel after the TXOP ends (see at least paragraph [0261]).
Regarding claim 20. Li in view of Viger discloses a method, wherein the STA is not an enhanced multi-link single radio (EMLSR) STA (see at least figure 1).
Claims 15 and 18 under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Li in view of Viger and further in view of Sundaravaradhan et al (US 2023/0239743). Hereinafter referred to as Sundaravaradhan.
Regarding claim 15, Li in view of Viger discloses all the limitations of the claimed invention with the exception that the initial frame exchange uses a buffer status report poll (BSRP) Trigger message to solicit a Quality of Service (QOS) Null as the initial frame exchange to initiate a dynamic channel switch. However, Sundaravaradhan, from the same field of endeavor, teaches the initial frame exchange uses a buffer status report poll (BSRP) Trigger message to solicit a Quality of Service (QOS) Null as the initial frame exchange to initiate a dynamic channel switch (see at least paragraph [0104]). Thus, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the time of the invention to employ the teaching of Sundaravaradhan, as indicated, into the communication method of Li in view of Viger for the purpose of managing resources and dynamically switching between channels.
Regarding claim 18, Li in view of Viger discloses all the limitations of the claimed invention with the exception that the initial frame exchange uses a double multi-user request to send plus clear to send messages followed by a buffer status report poll (BSRP) Trigger message plus a quality-of-service Null message to initiate a dynamic channel switch. However, Sundaravaradhan, from the same field of endeavor, teaches the initial frame exchange uses a double multi-user request to send plus clear to send messages followed by a buffer status report poll (BSRP) Trigger message plus a quality-of-service Null message to initiate a dynamic channel switch (see at least paragraph [0104]). Thus, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the time of the invention to employ the teaching of Sundaravaradhan, as indicated, into the communication method of Li in view of Viger for the purpose of managing resources and dynamically switching between channels.
Claim 21 under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Li in view of Viger and further in view of Margalit (US 2005/008933).
Regarding claim 21, Li in view of Viger discloses all the limitations of the claimed invention with the exception the STA switches back to the primary channel after the STA detects a failed frame exchange with it, or detects a frame exchange that does not include it. However, Margalit, from the same field of endeavor, teaches the STA switches back to the primary channel after the STA detects a failed frame exchange with it, or detects a frame exchange that does not include it (see at least paragraph [0026]). Thus, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the time of the invention to employ the teaching of Margalit, as indicated, into the communication method of Li in view of Viger for the purpose of managing resources in the case of failures.
Claim 22 under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Li in view of Viger and further in view of Wang et al (US 2023/0319722). Hereinafter referred to as Wang.
Regarding claim 22, Li in view of Viger discloses all the limitations of the claimed invention with the exception the STA is an enhanced multi-link single radio (EMLSR) STA. However, Wang, from the same field of endeavor, teaches the STA is an enhanced multi-link single radio (EMLSR) STA (see at least paragraph [0009]). Thus, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the time of the invention to employ the teaching of Wagn, as indicated, into the communication method of Li in view of Viger for the purpose of enabling multiple channel communication.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 2-4, 7-9, 11, 12, 14, and 16-17 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.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. See PTO_892.
In the case of amending the claimed invention, Applicant is respectfully requested to indicate the portion(s) of the specification which dictate(s) the structure relied on for proper interpretation and also to verify and ascertain the metes and bounds of the claimed invention.
When responding to this office action, applicants are advised to clearly point out the patentable novelty which they think the claims present in view of the state of the art disclosed by the references cited or the objections made. Applicants must also show how the amendments avoid such references or objections. See 37C.F.R 1.111(c). In addition, applicants are advised to provide the examiner with the line numbers and pages numbers in the application and/or references cited to assist examiner in locating the appropriate paragraphs.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MOUNIR MOUTAOUAKIL whose telephone number is (571)270-1416. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 10AM-4PM 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, Ayaz Sheikh can be reached at 571-272-3795. 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.
/MOUNIR MOUTAOUAKIL/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2476
Prosecution Insights