07/09/2026Detailed 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 .
Election/Restrictions
Claims 9-12 withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected group II, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Election was made without prejudice or disclaimer in the reply filed on 07/09/2026.
Applicant’s election without prejudice or disclaimer of group I (claims 1-8 and 13-20) in the reply filed on 07/09/2026 is acknowledged.
Claim Objections
Claims 4 and 16 are objected to because of the following informalities:
a) On line 2 of claim 4, replace “TXOP” with “transmission opportunity (TXOP)”;
b) On line 3 of claim 16, replace “TXOP” with “transmission opportunity (TXOP)”;
Appropriate correction is required.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statements submitted on 05/24/2024 and 02/24/2025 have been considered by the Examiner and made of record in the application file.
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 1-6, 8, 13-18 and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a) (1) as being anticipated by Applicant provide KIM et al. (US 2023/0180314 Al, hereinafter Kim).
Regarding claim 1, Kim discloses, method for wireless communication (see e.g., “Method for AP-Initiated P2P Transmission”, [0099]), comprising:
determining, by an access point (AP), a second non-access point (non-AP) station (STA) (see e.g., “A. AP MLD may broadcast time information for non-AP MLD to transmit a P2P request indicating the intention of P2P transmission to AP MLD.”, [0102]), wherein the second non-AP STA is a receiver device that is to perform a peer-to-peer (P2P) transmission with a first non-AP STA (see e.g., “B. A non-AP MLD P2P STA(s) with data for P2P transmission may transmit a request signal during the time interval specified in A…The location information may be used by the AP MLD to schedule one or more P2P transmission pairs. The channel availability information may indicate whether a channel between the P2P initiating non-AP MLD STA and the target P2P Non-AP MLD STA is available.”, [0103]).
Regarding claim 2, Kim discloses, wherein the second non-AP STA is determined based on first indication information sent by the first non-AP STA (see e.g., “A. AP MLD may broadcast time information for non-AP MLD to transmit a P2P request indicating the intention of P2P transmission to AP MLD.”, [0102] and/or “A. AP MLD may broadcast time information for non-AP MLD to transmit a P2P request indicating the intention of P2P transmission to AP MLD”, [0103]).
Regarding claim 3, Kim discloses, wherein the first indication information indicates medium access control (MAC) address information of the second non-AP STA (see e.g., “The request signal includes its own source address, target P2P non-AP MLD information (for example, MLD level MAC address, etc.)…”, [0103]).
Regarding claim 4, Kim discloses, restricting, by the AP, a relevant transmission of a first transmission in a TXOP duration shared by the AP to the first non-AP STA, wherein the first transmission is a transmission to be performed in the TXOP duration shared by the AP to the first non-AP STA, or a transmission being performed in the TXOP duration shared by the AP to the first non-AP STA (see e.g., “For P2P transmission, the AP MLD may allocate all or part of a transmission opportunity (TXOP).”, [0110] and/or “P2P transmission may entirely use the TXOP obtained by the AP, or may share the TXOP with general transmission (ie, transmission between the STA and the AP). When the AP transmits TXOP-related information to an STA... information related to whether to use TXOP only for P2P transmission or whether to use TXOP for both P2P transmission and general transmission may be transmitted. For example, information related to TXOP may transmit an indicator related to whether the TXOP is for P2P transmission only or whether the TXOP is for both general transmission and P2P transmission. For example, the indicator may include information that if it has a value of 0, TXOP is for P2P transmission only, and if it has a value of 1, TXOP is for both P2P transmission and general transmission as 1-bit information.”, [0111]).
Regarding claim 5, Kim discloses, wherein the first transmission is a transmission between the first non-AP STA and the second non-AP STA (see e.g., “When TXOP is used for both P2P transmission and normal transmission, P2P transmission may be performed within the TXOP before normal transmission,”, [0112]); and wherein the relevant transmission of the first transmission comprises at least one of the following:
a P2P transmission initiated by an STA to the another STA other than the first non-AP STA using a TXOP sharing mechanism (see e.g., “P2P transmission may entirely use the TXOP obtained by the AP, or may share the TXOP with general transmission (ie, transmission between the STA and the AP). When the AP transmits TXOP-related information to an STA (for example, a source STA that is a P2P initiator)…”, [0111]).
Regarding claim 6, Kim discloses, wherein the first transmission is a transmission between the first non-AP STA and the second non-AP STA (see e.g., “When TXOP is used for both P2P transmission and normal transmission, P2P transmission may be performed within the TXOP before normal transmission,”, [0112]); and wherein the relevant transmission of the first transmission comprises at least one of the following:
a downlink transmission initiated by an AP to another STA other than the first non-AP STA (see e.g., “a downlink may imply a link for communication from the AP STA to the non-AP STA”, [0048] and/or “AP MLD may broadcast time information for non-AP MLD to transmit a P2P request indicating the intention of P2P transmission to AP MLD”, [0102]).
Regarding claim 8, Kim discloses, wherein the P2P transmission between the first non-AP STA and the second non-AP STA is based on a TXOP shared by the AP (see e.g., “P2P transmission may entirely use the TXOP obtained by the AP, or may share the TXOP with general transmission (ie, transmission between the STA and the AP). When the AP transmits TXOP-related information to an STA (for example, a source STA that is a P2P initiator), information related to whether to use TXOP only for P2P transmission or whether to use TXOP for both P2P transmission and general transmission may be transmitted.”, [0111] and/or “The channel availability information may indicate whether a channel between the P2P initiating non-AP MLD STA and the target P2P Non-AP MLD STA is available.”, [0103]).
Regarding claim 13, Kim discloses, an access point (AP) (see e.g., Fig. 3, Access Point AP), comprising:
a memory (see e.g., Fig. 3, AP, with inherent memory), configured to store a computer program; and
a processor (see e.g., Fig. 3, AP, with inherent processor), configured to invoke and run the computer program stored in the memory to perform operations comprising:
determining a second non-access point (non-AP) station (STA) (see e.g., “A. AP MLD may broadcast time information for non-AP MLD to transmit a P2P request indicating the intention of P2P transmission to AP MLD.”, [0102]), wherein the second non-AP STA is a receiver device that is to perform a peer-to-peer (P2P) transmission with a first non-AP STA (see e.g., “B. A non-AP MLD P2P STA(s) with data for P2P transmission may transmit a request signal during the time interval specified in A…The location information may be used by the AP MLD to schedule one or more P2P transmission pairs. The channel availability information may indicate whether a channel between the P2P initiating non-AP MLD STA and the target P2P Non-AP MLD STA is available.”, [0103]).
Regarding claim 14, Kim discloses, wherein the second non-AP STA is determined based on first indication information sent by the first non-AP STA (see e.g., “A. AP MLD may broadcast time information for non-AP MLD to transmit a P2P request indicating the intention of P2P transmission to AP MLD.”, [0102] and/or “A. AP MLD may broadcast time information for non-AP MLD to transmit a P2P request indicating the intention of P2P transmission to AP MLD”, [0103]).
Regarding claim 15, Kim discloses, wherein the first indication information indicates medium access control (MAC) address information of the second non-AP STA (see e.g., “The request signal includes its own source address, target P2P non-AP MLD information (for example, MLD level MAC address, etc.)…”, [0103]).
Regarding claim 16, Kim discloses, restricting a relevant transmission of a first transmission in a TXOP duration shared by the AP to the first non-AP STA, wherein the first transmission is a transmission to be performed in the TXOP duration shared by the AP to the first non-AP STA, or a transmission being performed in the TXOP duration shared by the AP to the first non-AP STA (see e.g., “For P2P transmission, the AP MLD may allocate all or part of a transmission opportunity (TXOP).”, [0110] and/or “P2P transmission may entirely use the TXOP obtained by the AP, or may share the TXOP with general transmission (ie, transmission between the STA and the AP). When the AP transmits TXOP-related information to an STA... information related to whether to use TXOP only for P2P transmission or whether to use TXOP for both P2P transmission and general transmission may be transmitted. For example, information related to TXOP may transmit an indicator related to whether the TXOP is for P2P transmission only or whether the TXOP is for both general transmission and P2P transmission. For example, the indicator may include information that if it has a value of 0, TXOP is for P2P transmission only, and if it has a value of 1, TXOP is for both P2P transmission and general transmission as 1-bit information.”, [0111]).
Regarding claim 17, Kim discloses, wherein the first transmission is a transmission between the first non-AP STA and the second non-AP STA (see e.g., “When TXOP is used for both P2P transmission and normal transmission, P2P transmission may be performed within the TXOP before normal transmission,”, [0112]); and wherein the relevant transmission of the first transmission comprises at least one of the following:
a P2P transmission initiated by an STA to the another STA other than the first non-AP STA using a TXOP sharing mechanism (see e.g., “P2P transmission may entirely use the TXOP obtained by the AP, or may share the TXOP with general transmission (ie, transmission between the STA and the AP). When the AP transmits TXOP-related information to an STA (for example, a source STA that is a P2P initiator)…”, [0111]).
Regarding claim 18, Kim discloses, wherein the first transmission is a transmission between the first non-AP STA and the second non-AP STA (see e.g., “When TXOP is used for both P2P transmission and normal transmission, P2P transmission may be performed within the TXOP before normal transmission,”, [0112]); and wherein the relevant transmission of the first transmission comprises at least one of the following:
a downlink transmission initiated by an AP to another STA other than the first non-AP STA (see e.g., “a downlink may imply a link for communication from the AP STA to the non-AP STA”, [0048] and/or “AP MLD may broadcast time information for non-AP MLD to transmit a P2P request indicating the intention of P2P transmission to AP MLD”, [0102]).
Regarding claim 20, Kim discloses, wherein the P2P transmission between the first non-AP STA and the second non-AP STA is based on a TXOP shared by the AP (see e.g., “P2P transmission may entirely use the TXOP obtained by the AP, or may share the TXOP with general transmission (ie, transmission between the STA and the AP). When the AP transmits TXOP-related information to an STA (for example, a source STA that is a P2P initiator), information related to whether to use TXOP only for P2P transmission or whether to use TXOP for both P2P transmission and general transmission may be transmitted.”, [0111] and/or “The channel availability information may indicate whether a channel between the P2P initiating non-AP MLD STA and the target P2P Non-AP MLD STA is available.”, [0103]).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103(a) which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
(a) A patent may not be obtained though the invention is not identically disclosed or described as set forth in section 102 of this title, if the differences between the subject matter sought to be patented and the prior art are such that the subject matter as a whole would have been obvious at the time the invention was made to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which said subject matter pertains. Patentability shall not be negatived by the manner in which the invention was made.
The factual inquiries set forth in Graham v. John Deere Co., 383 U.S. 1, 148 USPQ 459 (1966), that are applied 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.
Claims 7 and 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103(a) as being unpatentable over Kim, in view of, KWON et al. (US 2021/0385692 Al, hereinafter Kwon).
Regarding claim 7, Kim fails to explicitly disclose, wherein the first non-AP STA works on a plurality of links comprising at least one non-simultaneous transmit and receive (NSTR) link pair comprising two links that cannot simultaneously transmit and receive.
In the same field of endeavor, Kwon discloses, wherein the first non-AP STA works on a plurality of links comprising at least one non-simultaneous transmit and receive (NSTR) link pair comprising two links that cannot simultaneously transmit and receive (see e.g., “The non-AP MLD (STA1 on link 1 310 and STA2 on link 2 340) is an NSTR MLD on link 1 310 and link 2 340…The non-AP MLD intends to transmit trigger frame 320 on both link 1 310 and link 2 340.”, Fig. 3, [0115]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine teachings of Kim with Kwon, in order to save power by a non-access point (non-AP) multi-link device (MLD), wherein a plurality of links are established between the non-AP MLD and an AP MLD (please see Kwon, [0004]).
Regarding claim 19, Kim fails to explicitly disclose, wherein the first non-AP STA works on a plurality of links comprising at least one non-simultaneous transmit and receive (NSTR) link pair comprising two links that cannot simultaneously transmit and receive.
In the same field of endeavor, Kwon discloses, wherein the first non-AP STA works on a plurality of links comprising at least one non-simultaneous transmit and receive (NSTR) link pair comprising two links that cannot simultaneously transmit and receive (see e.g., “The non-AP MLD (STA1 on link 1 310 and STA2 on link 2 340) is an NSTR MLD on link 1 310 and link 2 340…The non-AP MLD intends to transmit trigger frame 320 on both link 1 310 and link 2 340.”, Fig. 3, [0115]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine teachings of Kim with Kwon, in order to save power by a non-access point (non-AP) multi-link device (MLD), wherein a plurality of links are established between the non-AP MLD and an AP MLD (please see Kwon, [0004]).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to FARID SEYEDVOSOGHI whose telephone number is (571)272-9679. The examiner can normally be reached Mon - Fri 8:00-5:00.
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, Anthony S. Addy can be reached at 5712727795. 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.
/FARID SEYEDVOSOGHI/ Examiner, Art Unit 2645
Prosecution Insights