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
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 02/16/24 has been considered by the examiner.
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.
Claim(s) 17-18 and 20-29 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over CHITRAKAR et al. (US Patent Publication 2023/0319877 herein after referenced as Chitra).
Regarding claim 17, Chitra discloses:
A method performed by a first station (STA) in a wireless local area network (WLAN) system, the method comprising: receiving, from a second STA, measurement session establishment information including at least one sensing measurement parameter element; (Chitra, Fig. 17 & [0118] discloses the process for sensing session negotiation may start in step 1708 when a WLAN (i.e. reads on in a WLAN system) sensing requester, in this case STA1 1702, transmits (i.e. reads on receiving from a second STA) a sensing session request frame comprising (i.e. reads on measurement session establishment information including) a Session ID and transmission parameters (i.e. reads on at least one sensing measurement parameter element) for subsequent solicited channel measurements to a first sensing receiver, in this case STA2 1704 (i.e. reads on a first station STA) and in step 1710, the first sensing receiver 1704 then transmits a sensing session response frame comprising a status to accept or reject the request; Chitra, [0001] discloses the present disclosure relates to communication apparatuses and methods for wireless local network WLAN sensing).
Chitra discloses in one embodiment that the first STA1 transmits a session request frame that includes a session ID and transmission parameters to a second STA2 but fails to explicitly disclose in the same embodiment that the second STA2 transmits or receives sensing signals based on the received transmission parameters and that the session ID corresponds to the transmission parameters and therefore fails to disclose in the same embodiment, the limitations of “and performing at least one of a transmission or a reception of a sensing signal based on one specific sensing measurement parameter element among the at least one sensing measurement parameter element, wherein the at least one sensing measurement parameter element respectively corresponds to at least one measurement session identifier.”
In a different embodiment, Chitra discloses:
and performing at least one of a transmission (Chitra, [0078] discloses the sensing requester transmits a Request frame to the sensing responder, the Request frame specifying the transmission parameters of a response PPDU that is solicited for channel measurements and the sensing responder uses the requested transmission parameters (i.e. reads on based on one specific sensing measurement parameter element among the at least one sensing measurement parameter element) to generate a response PPDU and transmit the response PPDU (i.e. reads on transmission of a sensing signal) to the sensing requester and subsequently, the sensing requestor uses the response PPDU to perform channel measurements; Chitra, [0053] discloses the term “null data packet” or “NDP” may be used interchangeably with the term “sounding physical layer protocol data unit PPDU” or “response PPDU”; Chitra, [0077] discloses during solicited channel measurements such as Request/Response exchange, the request specifies the transmission parameters of a Response PPDU, such as the format of the Response PPDU including HT NDP, VHT NDP, HE NDP, etc., requester's transmit power and target RSSI for the Response PPDU, number of spatial streams in the Response PPDU and bandwidth of the Response PPDU and the responder then transmits a response PPDU using the requested transmission parameters. EXAMINER’S NOTE: The examiner notes that the claims are written in an alternative limitation format requiring and contingent on the selection of only one of various alternative options presented and as such the non-selected alternative options are crossed out (i.e. the limitations reciting “or a reception of a sensing signal”) and are not given patentable weight as being directed towards limitations that are not required to be performed as is indicated in MPEP 2143.03 that recites “Language that suggests or makes a feature or step optional but does not require that feature or step does not limit the scope of a claim under the broadest reasonable claim interpretation. In addition, when a claim requires selection of an element from a list of alternatives, the prior art teaches the element if one of the alternatives is taught by the prior art” and in MPEP 2111.04, Section ll that recites “The broadest reasonable interpretation of a claim having contingent limitations requires only those steps that must be performed and does not include steps that are not required to be performed because the condition precedent are not met”).
wherein the at least one sensing measurement parameter element respectively corresponds to at least one measurement session identifier (Chitra, [0119] discloses the parameters such as Session ID (i.e. reads on respectively corresponds to at least one measurement session identifier) and transmission parameters (i.e. reads on wherein the at least one sensing measurement parameter element) accepted by the sensing receivers, during the sensing session negotiation stage will be used for subsequent solicited channel measurements and will remain the same throughout the WLAN sensing session; Chitra, [0079] discloses a Session ID subfield to indicate WLAN Sensing Session).
Therefore, at the time before the effective filing date of the invention, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the invention of Chitra to incorporate the teachings of the different embodiments for the purpose of conforming to the intent of the invention to modify and combine the various different embodiment (Chitra, [0172]-[0173]) and for the purpose of making the system more dynamic and adaptable by providing the system with various different alternatives in design and functionality, thereby allowing the system to handle a number of various different combination of specific design structure and scenarios and preventing the system from being limited to a single specific design structure and scenario and furthermore, one of ordinary skill in the art would recognize based on the guidelines to rationales supporting a conclusion of obviousness seen on MPEP 2143, that the modification would involve use of a simple substitution of one known element and base device (i.e. performing a process of an embodiment of transmitting a request frame that comprises transmission parameters as taught by Chitra) with another known element and comparable device utilizing a known technique (i.e. performing a process of a similar embodiment of transmitting a request frame that comprises transmission parameters with additional and/or alternative features and functionalities of the other embodiments as taught by Chitra) to improve the similar devices in the same way and to obtain the predictable result of the system performing a process of an embodiment of transmitting a request frame that comprises transmission parameters (i.e. as taught by Chitra) and is dependent upon the specific intended use, design incentives, needs and requirements (i.e. such as due to teachings of a known standard, current technology, conservation of resources, personal preferences, economic considerations, etc.) of the user and the system as has been established in MPEP 2144.04.
Regarding claim 18, Chitra discloses:
The method of claim 17, (see claim 17).
wherein: the at least one sensing measurement parameter element includes a plurality of sensing measurement parameter sets, each of the plurality of sensing measurement parameter sets corresponds to a measurement session identifier (Chitra, [0077] discloses during solicited channel measurements such as Request/Response exchange, the request specifies the transmission parameters of a Response PPDU, such as the format of the Response PPDU including HT NDP, VHT NDP, HE NDP, etc., requester's transmit power and target RSSI for the Response PPDU, number of spatial streams in the Response PPDU and bandwidth of the Response PPDU and the responder then transmits a response PPDU using the requested transmission parameters; Chitra, [0119] discloses the parameters such as Session ID and transmission parameters accepted by the sensing receivers, during the sensing session negotiation stage will be used for subsequent solicited channel measurements and will remain the same throughout the WLAN sensing session; Chitra, [0079] discloses a Session ID subfield to indicate WLAN Sensing Session).
Regarding claim 20, Chitra discloses:
The method of claim 17, (see claim 17).
wherein: the one specific sensing measurement parameter element is a sensing measurement parameter element corresponding to one specific measurement session identifier indicated in a sensing measurement exchange (Chitra, [0077] discloses during solicited channel measurements such as Request/Response exchange, the request specifies the transmission parameters of a Response PPDU, such as the format of the Response PPDU including HT NDP, VHT NDP, HE NDP, etc., requester's transmit power and target RSSI for the Response PPDU, number of spatial streams in the Response PPDU and bandwidth of the Response PPDU and the responder then transmits a response PPDU using the requested transmission parameters; Chitra, [0119] discloses the parameters such as Session ID and transmission parameters accepted by the sensing receivers, during the sensing session negotiation stage will be used for subsequent solicited channel measurements and will remain the same throughout the WLAN sensing session; Chitra, [0079] discloses a Session ID subfield to indicate WLAN Sensing Session).
Regarding claim 21, Chitra discloses:
The method of claim 17, (see claim 17).
wherein: the sensing signal is a null data packet (NDP) (Chitra, [0053] discloses the term “null data packet” or “NDP” may be used interchangeably with the term “sounding physical layer protocol data unit PPDU” or “response PPDU”; Chitra, [0078] discloses the sensing requester transmits a Request frame to the sensing responder, the Request frame specifying the transmission parameters of a response PPDU that is solicited for channel measurements and the sensing responder uses the requested transmission parameters to generate a response PPDU and transmit the response PPDU to the sensing requester and subsequently, the sensing requestor uses the response PPDU to perform channel measurements).
Regarding claim 22, Chitra discloses:
The method of claim 17, (see claim 17).
(EXAMINER’S NOTE: The examiner notes that the claims are written in a contingent limitation format directed towards limitations contingent on a selection of a non-selected alternative option recited in the preceding limitations and as such are crossed out (i.e. the limitations reciting “wherein: the reception of the sensing signal is performed based on a NDP announcement (NDPA) frame within a sensing measurement exchange”) and are not given patentable weight as being directed towards limitations that are not required to be performed as is indicated in MPEP 2143.03, Section C that recites “Language that suggests or makes a feature or step optional but does not require that feature or step does not limit the scope of a claim under the broadest reasonable claim interpretation. In addition, when a claim requires selection of an element from a list of alternatives, the prior art teaches the element if one of the alternatives is taught by the prior art” and in MPEP 2111.04, Section ll that recites “The broadest reasonable interpretation of a claim having contingent limitations requires only those steps that must be performed and does not include steps that are not required to be performed because the condition precedent are not met”).
Regarding claim 23, Chitra discloses:
The method of claim 17, (see claim 17).
wherein: the transmission of the sensing signal is performed based on a trigger frame within a sensing measurement exchange (Chitra, [0126] discloses the sensing requester transmits a trigger frame simultaneously to three sensing responders STA2, STA3, STA4 and in this example, the Request frame is requesting one 40 MHz Sounding PPDU from STA2, one 20 MHz Sounding PPDU from STA3 and one 20 MHz Sounding PPDU from STA4 and after the last symbol of the trigger frame is transmitted, a SIFS may take effect and the sensing responder transmits a 40 MHz HE TB Ranging NDP in the first and second 20 MHz subchannels of the 80 MHz frequency segment; the sensing responder transmits a 20 MHz HE TB Ranging NDP in the third 20 MHz subchannel of the 80 MHz frequency segment; and the sensing responder transmits a 20 MHz HE TB Ranging NDP in the fourth 20 MHz subchannel of the 80 MHz frequency segment and subsequently, the sensing requester uses the HE TB Ranging PPDUs to perform channel measurements for sensing responders; Chitra, [0077] discloses during solicited channel measurements such as Request/Response exchange, the request specifies the transmission parameters of a Response PPDU, such as the format of the Response PPDU including HT NDP, VHT NDP, HE NDP, etc., requester's transmit power and target RSSI for the Response PPDU, number of spatial streams in the Response PPDU and bandwidth of the Response PPDU and the responder then transmits a response PPDU using the requested transmission parameters).
Regarding claim 24, Chitra discloses:
The method of claim 17, (see claim 17).
wherein: the measurement session establishment information is included in a sensing measurement request frame, in response to the sensing measurement request frame, a sensing measurement response frame is transmitted from the first STA to the second STA (Chitra, Fig. 17 & [0118] discloses the process for sensing session negotiation may start in step 1708 when a WLAN sensing requester, in this case STA1 1702, transmits a sensing session request frame comprising a Session ID and transmission parameters for subsequent solicited channel measurements to a first sensing receiver, in this case STA2 1704 and in step 1710, the first sensing receiver 1704 then transmits a sensing session response frame comprising a status to accept or reject the request).
Regarding claim 25, Chitra discloses:
The method of claim 24, (see claim 24).
wherein: at least one of the request frame or the response frame has an action frame format (Chitra, [0120]-0121] discloses two Public Action frames are defined as the WLAN Sensing Session Request frame and the WLAN Sensing Session Response frame used and discloses a Public Action frame may comprise a Frame Control field, a Duration field, three Address fields, a Sequence Control field, a HT Control field, a Category field or Public Action field, a Dialog Token field and a Frame Check Sequence FCS field).
Regarding claim 26, Chitra discloses:
The method of claim 24, (see claim 24).
wherein: the response frame includes at least one response frame transmitted by at least one STA including the first STA, (Chitra, Fig. 17 & [0118] discloses the process for sensing session negotiation may start in step 1708 when a WLAN sensing requester, in this case STA1 1702, transmits a sensing session request frame comprising a Session ID and transmission parameters for subsequent solicited channel measurements to a first sensing receiver, in this case STA2 1704 and in step 1710, the first sensing receiver 1704 then transmits a sensing session response frame comprising a status to accept or reject the request. EXAMINER’S NOTE: The examiner notes that the claims are written in an alternative limitation format requiring and contingent on the selection of only one of various alternative options presented and as such the non-selected alternative options are crossed out (i.e. the limitations reciting “the at least one response frame is transmitted simultaneously by the at least one STA, or”) and are not given patentable weight as being directed towards limitations that are not required to be performed as is indicated in MPEP 2143.03 that recites “Language that suggests or makes a feature or step optional but does not require that feature or step does not limit the scope of a claim under the broadest reasonable claim interpretation. In addition, when a claim requires selection of an element from a list of alternatives, the prior art teaches the element if one of the alternatives is taught by the prior art” and in MPEP 2111.04, Section ll that recites “The broadest reasonable interpretation of a claim having contingent limitations requires only those steps that must be performed and does not include steps that are not required to be performed because the condition precedent are not met”).
Regarding claim 27, Chitra discloses:
The method of claim 17, (see claim 17).
wherein: the first STA is a sensing responder, the second STA is a sensing initiator (Chitra, Fig. 17 & [0118] discloses the process for sensing session negotiation may start in step 1708 when a WLAN sensing requester, in this case STA1 1702, transmits a sensing session request frame comprising a Session ID and transmission parameters for subsequent solicited channel measurements to a first sensing receiver, in this case STA2 1704 and in step 1710, the first sensing receiver 1704 then transmits a sensing session response frame comprising a status to accept or reject the request; Chitra, [0061] discloses a 11bf capable device that requests another device to sound the channel may be called WLAN Sensing Requester/Initiator and A 11bf capable device that responds to another device's sensing request to sound the channel may be called WLAN Sensing Responder and A WLAN Sensing transmitter is a device that transmits the sounding PPDU and for solicited case, it may be same as WLAN Sensing Responder and a device that performs channel measurements based on the received sounding PPDUs is a WLAN Sensing receiver and for solicited case, this may be same as WLAN Sensing Requester/Initiator).
Regarding claim 28, Chitra discloses:
A first station (STA) in a wireless local area network (WLAN) system, the device comprising: at least one transceiver; and at least one processor coupled with the at least one transceiver, wherein the at least one processor is configured to:
receive, through the at least one transceiver, from a second STA, measurement session establishment information including at least one sensing measurement parameter element; (Chitra, Fig. 17 & [0118] discloses the process for sensing session negotiation may start in step 1708 when a WLAN (i.e. reads on in a WLAN system) sensing requester, in this case STA1 1702, transmits (i.e. reads on receiving from a second STA) a sensing session request frame comprising (i.e. reads on measurement session establishment information including) a Session ID and transmission parameters (i.e. reads on at least one sensing measurement parameter element) for subsequent solicited channel measurements to a first sensing receiver, in this case STA2 1704 (i.e. reads on a first station STA) and in step 1710, the first sensing receiver 1704 then transmits a sensing session response frame comprising a status to accept or reject the request; Chitra, [0001] discloses the present disclosure relates to communication apparatuses and methods for wireless local network WLAN sensing; Chitra, [0166] discloses the communication apparatus may comprise a transceiver and processing/control circuitry and the transceiver may comprise and/or function as a receiver and a transmitter. One of ordinary skill in the art would recognize that it is inherent for a complex device such as the STA to include a processing circuitry and transceiver in order to be able to perform the disclosed functionalities).
Chitra discloses in one embodiment that the first STA1 transmits a session request frame that includes a session ID and transmission parameters to a second STA2 but fails to explicitly disclose in the same embodiment that the second STA2 transmits or receives sensing signals based on the received transmission parameters and that the session ID corresponds to the transmission parameters and therefore fails to disclose in the same embodiment, the limitations of “and perform, through the at least one transceiver, at least one of a transmission or a reception of a sensing signal based on one specific sensing measurement parameter element among the at least one sensing measurement parameter element, wherein the at least one sensing measurement parameter element respectively corresponds to at least one sensing measurement setup identifier.”
In a different embodiment, Chitra discloses:
and perform, through the at least one transceiver, at least one of a transmission (Chitra, [0078] discloses the sensing requester transmits a Request frame to the sensing responder, the Request frame specifying the transmission parameters of a response PPDU that is solicited for channel measurements and the sensing responder uses the requested transmission parameters (i.e. reads on based on one specific sensing measurement parameter element among the at least one sensing measurement parameter element) to generate a response PPDU and transmit the response PPDU (i.e. reads on transmission of a sensing signal) to the sensing requester and subsequently, the sensing requestor uses the response PPDU to perform channel measurements; Chitra, [0053] discloses the term “null data packet” or “NDP” may be used interchangeably with the term “sounding physical layer protocol data unit PPDU” or “response PPDU”; Chitra, [0077] discloses during solicited channel measurements such as Request/Response exchange, the request specifies the transmission parameters of a Response PPDU, such as the format of the Response PPDU including HT NDP, VHT NDP, HE NDP, etc., requester's transmit power and target RSSI for the Response PPDU, number of spatial streams in the Response PPDU and bandwidth of the Response PPDU and the responder then transmits a response PPDU using the requested transmission parameters; Chitra, [0166] discloses the communication apparatus may comprise a transceiver and processing/control circuitry and the transceiver may comprise and/or function as a receiver and a transmitter. EXAMINER’S NOTE: The examiner notes that the claims are written in an alternative limitation format requiring and contingent on the selection of only one of various alternative options presented and as such the non-selected alternative options are crossed out (i.e. the limitations reciting “or a reception of a sensing signal”) and are not given patentable weight as being directed towards limitations that are not required to be performed as is indicated in MPEP 2143.03 that recites “Language that suggests or makes a feature or step optional but does not require that feature or step does not limit the scope of a claim under the broadest reasonable claim interpretation. In addition, when a claim requires selection of an element from a list of alternatives, the prior art teaches the element if one of the alternatives is taught by the prior art” and in MPEP 2111.04, Section ll that recites “The broadest reasonable interpretation of a claim having contingent limitations requires only those steps that must be performed and does not include steps that are not required to be performed because the condition precedent are not met”).
wherein the at least one sensing measurement parameter element respectively corresponds to at least one measurement session identifier (Chitra, [0119] discloses the parameters such as Session ID (i.e. reads on respectively corresponds to at least one measurement session identifier) and transmission parameters (i.e. reads on wherein the at least one sensing measurement parameter element) accepted by the sensing receivers, during the sensing session negotiation stage will be used for subsequent solicited channel measurements and will remain the same throughout the WLAN sensing session; Chitra, [0079] discloses a Session ID subfield to indicate WLAN Sensing Session).
Therefore, at the time before the effective filing date of the invention, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the invention of Chitra to incorporate the teachings of the different embodiments for the purpose of conforming to the intent of the invention to modify and combine the various different embodiment (Chitra, [0172]-[0173]) and for the purpose of making the system more dynamic and adaptable by providing the system with various different alternatives in design and functionality, thereby allowing the system to handle a number of various different combination of specific design structure and scenarios and preventing the system from being limited to a single specific design structure and scenario and furthermore, one of ordinary skill in the art would recognize based on the guidelines to rationales supporting a conclusion of obviousness seen on MPEP 2143, that the modification would involve use of a simple substitution of one known element and base device (i.e. performing a process of an embodiment of transmitting a request frame that comprises transmission parameters as taught by Chitra) with another known element and comparable device utilizing a known technique (i.e. performing a process of a similar embodiment of transmitting a request frame that comprises transmission parameters with additional and/or alternative features and functionalities of the other embodiments as taught by Chitra) to improve the similar devices in the same way and to obtain the predictable result of the system performing a process of an embodiment of transmitting a request frame that comprises transmission parameters (i.e. as taught by Chitra) and is dependent upon the specific intended use, design incentives, needs and requirements (i.e. such as due to teachings of a known standard, current technology, conservation of resources, personal preferences, economic considerations, etc.) of the user and the system as has been established in MPEP 2144.04.
Regarding claim 29, Chitra discloses:
A second station (STA) in a wireless local area network (WLAN) system, the device comprising: at least one transceiver; and at least one processor coupled with the at least one transceiver, wherein the at least one processor is configured to: transmit, through the at least one transceiver, to a first STA, measurement session establishment information including at least one sensing measurement parameter element;
(Chitra, Fig. 17 & [0118] discloses the process for sensing session negotiation may start in step 1708 when a WLAN (i.e. reads on in a WLAN system) sensing requester, in this case STA1 1702, transmits (i.e. reads on a second STA transmit) a sensing session request frame comprising (i.e. reads on measurement session establishment information including) a Session ID and transmission parameters (i.e. reads on at least one sensing measurement parameter element) for subsequent solicited channel measurements to a first sensing receiver, in this case STA2 1704 (i.e. reads on to a first STA) and in step 1710, the first sensing receiver 1704 then transmits a sensing session response frame comprising a status to accept or reject the request; Chitra, [0001] discloses the present disclosure relates to communication apparatuses and methods for wireless local network WLAN sensing; Chitra, [0166] discloses the communication apparatus may comprise a transceiver and processing/control circuitry and the transceiver may comprise and/or function as a receiver and a transmitter. One of ordinary skill in the art would recognize that it is inherent for a complex device such as the STA to include a processing circuitry and transceiver in order to be able to perform the disclosed functionalities).
Chitra discloses in one embodiment that the first STA1 transmits a session request frame that includes a session ID and transmission parameters to a second STA2 but fails to explicitly disclose in the same embodiment that the second STA2 transmits or receives sensing signals based on the received transmission parameters and that the session ID corresponds to the transmission parameters and therefore fails to disclose in the same embodiment, the limitations of “and perform, through the at least one transceiver, at least one of a transmission or a reception of a sensing signal based on one specific sensing measurement parameter element among the at least one sensing measurement parameter element, wherein the at least one sensing measurement parameter element respectively corresponds to at least one sensing measurement setup identifier”.
In a different embodiment, Chitra discloses:
and perform, through the at least one transceiver, at least one of a reception of a sensing signal based on one specific sensing measurement parameter element among the at least one sensing measurement parameter element, (Chitra, [0078] discloses the sensing requester transmits a Request frame to the sensing responder, the Request frame specifying the transmission parameters of a response PPDU that is solicited for channel measurements and the sensing responder uses the requested transmission parameters (i.e. reads on based on one specific sensing measurement parameter element among the at least one sensing measurement parameter element) to generate a response PPDU and transmit the response PPDU (i.e. reads on reception of a sensing signal) to the sensing requester and subsequently, the sensing requestor uses the response PPDU to perform channel measurements; Chitra, [0053] discloses the term “null data packet” or “NDP” may be used interchangeably with the term “sounding physical layer protocol data unit PPDU” or “response PPDU”; Chitra, [0077] discloses during solicited channel measurements such as Request/Response exchange, the request specifies the transmission parameters of a Response PPDU, such as the format of the Response PPDU including HT NDP, VHT NDP, HE NDP, etc., requester's transmit power and target RSSI for the Response PPDU, number of spatial streams in the Response PPDU and bandwidth of the Response PPDU and the responder then transmits a response PPDU using the requested transmission parameters. EXAMINER’S NOTE: The examiner notes that the claims are written in an alternative limitation format requiring and contingent on the selection of only one of various alternative options presented and as such the non-selected alternative options are crossed out (i.e. the limitations reciting “transmission of a sensing signal or”) and are not given patentable weight as being directed towards limitations that are not required to be performed as is indicated in MPEP 2143.03 that recites “Language that suggests or makes a feature or step optional but does not require that feature or step does not limit the scope of a claim under the broadest reasonable claim interpretation. In addition, when a claim requires selection of an element from a list of alternatives, the prior art teaches the element if one of the alternatives is taught by the prior art” and in MPEP 2111.04, Section ll that recites “The broadest reasonable interpretation of a claim having contingent limitations requires only those steps that must be performed and does not include steps that are not required to be performed because the condition precedent are not met”).
wherein the at least one sensing measurement parameter element respectively corresponds to at least one sensing measurement setup identifier (Chitra, [0119] discloses the parameters such as Session ID (i.e. reads on respectively corresponds to at least one measurement session identifier) and transmission parameters (i.e. reads on wherein the at least one sensing measurement parameter element) accepted by the sensing receivers, during the sensing session negotiation stage will be used for subsequent solicited channel measurements and will remain the same throughout the WLAN sensing session; Chitra, [0079] discloses a Session ID subfield to indicate WLAN Sensing Session).
Therefore, at the time before the effective filing date of the invention, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the invention of Chitra to incorporate the teachings of the different embodiments for the purpose of conforming to the intent of the invention to modify and combine the various different embodiment (Chitra, [0172]-[0173]) and for the purpose of making the system more dynamic and adaptable by providing the system with various different alternatives in design and functionality, thereby allowing the system to handle a number of various different combination of specific design structure and scenarios and preventing the system from being limited to a single specific design structure and scenario and furthermore, one of ordinary skill in the art would recognize based on the guidelines to rationales supporting a conclusion of obviousness seen on MPEP 2143, that the modification would involve use of a simple substitution of one known element and base device (i.e. performing a process of an embodiment of transmitting a request frame that comprises transmission parameters as taught by Chitra) with another known element and comparable device utilizing a known technique (i.e. performing a process of a similar embodiment of transmitting a request frame that comprises transmission parameters with additional and/or alternative features and functionalities of the other embodiments as taught by Chitra) to improve the similar devices in the same way and to obtain the predictable result of the system performing a process of an embodiment of transmitting a request frame that comprises transmission parameters (i.e. as taught by Chitra) and is dependent upon the specific intended use, design incentives, needs and requirements (i.e. such as due to teachings of a known standard, current technology, conservation of resources, personal preferences, economic considerations, etc.) of the user and the system as has been established in MPEP 2144.04.
Claim(s) 19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over CHITRAKAR et al. (US Patent Publication 2023/0319877 herein after referenced as Chitra) in view of DU et al. (US Patent Publication 2024/0155702 herein after referenced as Du).
Regarding claim 19, Chitra discloses:
The method of claim 17, (see claim 17).
Chitra discloses that the first STA1 transmits a session request frame that includes transmission parameters to a second STA2 and receives a response as to whether to accept or reject the request and Chitra, [0065] discloses that any group member can take any sensing role such as request / responder based on own and peer STA’s capabilities but fails to explicitly disclose that the role of sensing transmitter or receiver is included in the request and therefore fails to disclose “wherein: each sensing measurement parameter element includes information indicating at least one of a sensing transmitter role or a sensing receiver role of the first STA.”
In a related field of endeavor, Du discloses:
wherein: each sensing measurement parameter element includes information indicating at least one of a sensing transmitter role or a sensing receiver role of the first STA (Du, [0379] discloses in the sensing session, the AP is a sensing signal transmitter, and the STA 1 and the STA 2 are the plurality of second STAs associated with the AP and the AP sends a fifth frame to the STA 1 and the STA 2, to request the STA 1 and the STA 2 to participate in the sensing session, and allocates a third role and a fourth sensing parameter to both the STA 1 and the STA 2 and the AP receives the fifth information sent by the STA 1 and the STA 2 and the fifth information sent by the STA 1 to the AP indicates that the STA 1 confirms to participate in the sensing session as a receiver as the third role corresponding to the STA 1 and the fifth information sent by the STA 2 to the AP indicates that the STA 2 refuses to participate in the sensing session as a transmitter as the third role corresponding to the STA 2; Du, [0033] discloses a station STA receives a first frame from an access point AP, where the first frame includes first information, the first information indicates a first role of the STA in a sensing session, and the first role of the STA in the sensing session is a transmitter and/or a receiver and the STA sends a second frame to the AP, where the second frame includes confirm information for the first frame; Du, [0007] discloses for each STA participating in the sensing session, the AP allocates a role in the sensing session to the STA by sending the first frame to the STA, so that the AP can flexibly manage, by using the first frame, the role of the STA participating in the sensing session and this helps satisfy and meet a function requirement of a wireless sensing technology as much as possible in Wi-Fi communication).
Therefore, at the time before the effective filing date of the invention, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the invention of Chitra to incorporate the teachings of Du for the purpose of providing the system with a means to flexibly manage, by using the first frame, the role of the STA participating in the sensing session to satisfy and meet a function requirement of a wireless sensing technology as much as possible in Wi-Fi communication (Du, [0007]) and for the purpose of making the system more dynamic and adaptable by providing the system with various different alternatives in design and functionality, thereby allowing the system to handle a number of various different combination of specific design structure and scenarios and preventing the system from being limited to a single specific design structure and scenario and furthermore, one of ordinary skill in the art would recognize based on the guidelines to rationales supporting a conclusion of obviousness seen on MPEP 2143, that the modification would involve use of a simple substitution of one known element and base device (i.e. performing a process of a first STA1 transmitting a session request frame that includes transmission parameters to a second STA2 and receiving a response as to whether to accept or reject the request as taught by Chitra) with another known element and comparable device utilizing a known technique (i.e. performing a process of a first STA1 transmitting a session request frame that includes transmission parameters to a second STA2 and receiving a response as to whether to accept or reject the request, wherein the request frame includes a role of the device as taught by Du) to improve the similar devices in the same way and to obtain the predictable result of the system performing a process of a first STA1 transmitting a session request frame that includes transmission parameters to a second STA2 and receiving a response as to whether to accept or reject the request (i.e. as taught by both Chitra & Du) and is dependent upon the specific intended use, design incentives, needs and requirements (i.e. such as due to teachings of a known standard, current technology, conservation of resources, personal preferences, economic considerations, etc.) of the user and the system as has been established in MPEP 2144.04.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MICHAEL Y MAPA whose telephone number is (571)270-5540. The examiner can normally be reached Monday thru Thursday: 10 AM - 8 PM 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, Anthony Addy can be reached at (571) 272 - 7795. 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.
/MICHAEL Y MAPA/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2645