DETAILED ACTION
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
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 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.
This action is in response to preliminary amendments filed on 6/17/2026.
Claims 1, 3-5, 7, 9-11, 15-16, 18, & 20-22 have been examined and are rejected.
Priority
This application is a 371 of PCT/CN2021/122875 filed 10/9/2021.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments filed in the communications above have been fully considered but are moot because the arguments do not apply to the combination of references being used in the current rejection.
Claim Rejections – 35 USC § 103
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102 of this title, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
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 1, 3, 7, 9, 15-16, 18, & 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kim et al. (US 2024/0040428 A1) in view of Kim et al. (US 2023/0199551 A1), hereinafter referenced as Kim2, in view of Sevin et al. (US 2024/0381466 A1).
With regard to Claim 1, Kim teaches:
A multi-link communication method, performed by an access point (AP) supporting multi-link traffic, comprising:
determining a first message frame, wherein the first message frame comprises an information field indicating one or more links of a station (STA) supporting multi-link traffic to receive a buffered downlink data frame; (a transmitting multi-link device (MLD) generates a beacon frame comprising a Link Mapping Bitmap (LMB) element used to inform that there is buffered traffic for all links (first information) or a specific link (second information) used by the receiving MLD by defining the link bitmap for the specific receiving MLD [Kim: 0221; 0223; 0225; 0177], wherein the transmitting MLD is an AP and the receiving MLD is a non-AP STA [Kim: 0181; 0226; 0048-49], and wherein a downlink may imply a link for communication from the AP STA to the non-AP STA [Kim: 0067]);
and sending the first message frame; (the transmitting MLD transmits the beacon frame to the receiving MLD [Kim: 0222]);
wherein the information field comprises a plurality of first bits respectively corresponding to multi-links supported by the access point and the station, and when a corresponding first bit is set to a first value, indication information identifies that the station receives the buffered downlink data frame in a link corresponding to the corresponding first bit in the multi-links; (using a link bitmap for each MLD to indicate whether there is traffic for TIDs mapped to specific links [Kim: 0213; 0231; Fig. 20]);
wherein the information field comprises a second bit; (the first bit of the link bitmap for each MLD is used as a bit indicating whether there is traffic for the TID mapped to all links [Kim: 0214; 0230; Fig. 21]).
However, Kim does not teach:
wherein the first message frame comprises a TID-to-Link mapping response frame; and when a status code of sending a link in the first message frame is identified as refused, all the first bits of the information field are set to a second value to identify indication information that the station does not receive the buffered downlink data frame in all links.
In a similar field of endeavor involving link configuration for multi-link devices (MLD), Kim2 discloses:
wherein the first message frame comprises a TID-to-Link mapping response frame; (a multi-link device (MLD) receives a TID-to-Link mapping response frame comprising a mapping relationship of at least one TID and at least one link [Kim2: 0012; 0305-308]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Kim in view of Kim2 in order to transmit the buffered link mapping configuration of Kim with the TID-to-link configuration of Kim2.
One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to combine Kim with Kim2 as doing so would reduce management frame signaling by consolidating link configuration information into an existing link negotiation exchange.
However, Kim-Kim2 does not teach:
and when a status code of sending a link in the first message frame is identified as refused, all the first bits of the information field are set to a second value to identify indication information that the station does not receive the buffered downlink data frame in all links.
In a similar field of endeavor involving communicating in a Multi-Link Operating Mode, Sevin discloses:
and when a status code of sending a link in the first message frame is identified as refused, all the first bits of the information field are set to a second value to identify indication information that the station does not receive the buffered downlink data frame in all links; (upon receiving a request for Enhanced Multi-Link Operating Mode (EML OM) activation or deactivation, the AP MLD may send a response refusing the request [Sevin: 0083-84], wherein an EMLSR Link Bitmap is used to indicate a subset of the enabled links that is used by the non-AP MLD in the EMLSR mode such that bits corresponding to links used by the non-AP MLD for the EMLSR mode are set to 1, and otherwise the bits are set to 0 [Sevin: 0160; 0169-70]. Examiner notes that when EML OM is refused for all links, all bits corresponding to the links will be set to 0).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Kim-Kim2 in view of Sevin in order to set all the first bits of the information field to a second value to identify indication information that the station does not receive the buffered downlink data frame in all links when the first message frame is identified as refused in the system of Kim-Kim2.
One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to combine Kim-Kim2 with Sevin as doing so would clarify multi-link negotiations by setting bits in the EMLSR Link Bitmap to 1 only when the corresponding link is used by the non-AP MLD for the EMLSR mode.
With regard to Claim 3, Kim-Kim2-Sevin teaches:
The multi-link communication method according to claim 1, wherein when the second bit is set to a first value, indication information identifies that the station receives the buffered downlink data frame in all links; (the first bit of the link bitmap for each MLD is used as a bit indicating whether there is traffic for the TID mapped to all links [Kim: 0214; 0230; Fig. 21]).
With regard to Claim 17, Kim-Kim2-Sevin teaches:
The communication method according to claim 3, wherein when a status code of sending a link in the first message frame is identified as refused, the second bit of the information field is set to a second value to identify indication information that the station does not receive the buffered downlink data frame in all links; (upon receiving a request for Enhanced Multi-Link Operating Mode (EML OM) activation or deactivation, the AP MLD may send a response refusing the request [Sevin: 0083-84], wherein the signalling in the requesting frames may be simplified by using a single one-bit field to implicitly activate or deactivate the EML OM [Sevin: 0066; 0068]).
With regard to Claims 7, 9, 15-16, 18, & 20, they appear substantially similar to the limitations recited by claims 1, 3, & 17 and consequently do not appear to teach or further define over the citations provided for said claims. Accordingly, claims 7, 9, 15-16, 18, & 20 are rejected for the same reasons as set forth in claims 1, 3, & 17.
Claims 4, 10, & 21 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kim et al. (US 2024/0040428 A1) in view of Kim et al. (US 2023/0199551 A1), hereinafter referenced as Kim2, in view of Sevin et al. (US 2024/0381466 A1) as applied to Claims 1, 7, & 15 above, and further in view of Wang et al. (US 2022/0287122 A1).
With regard to Claim 4, Kim-Kim2-Sevin teaches the multi-link communication method according to claim 1, but does not teach:
wherein the information field is comprised in a media access control (MAC) frame header portion of the first message frame.
In a similar field of endeavor involving enabling multi-link wireless local area networks (WLAN), Wang discloses:
wherein the information field is comprised in a media access control (MAC) frame header portion of the first message frame; (a Multi-link Operation Mode request may be sent as a part of an EHT control header in the MAC or PHY header, wherein the multi-link AP may include one or more bitmaps for indicating requested changes for links operation on different channels [Wang: 0172-73]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Kim-Kim2-Sevin in view of Wang in order to utilize an information field is comprised in a media access control (MAC) frame header portion of the first message frame in the system of Kim-Kim2-Sevin.
One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to combine Kim-Kim2-Sevin with Wang as doing so would allow the Link Mapping Bitmap to be carried via existing frames and would enable the receiving MLD to determine which links have traffic as soon as the header is parsed, which is typically performed prior to payload processing.
With regard to Claims 10 & 21, they appear substantially similar to the limitations recited by claim 4 and consequently do not appear to teach or further define over the citations provided for said claim. Accordingly, claims 10 & 21 are rejected for the same reasons as set forth in claim 4.
Claims 5, 11, & 22 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kim et al. (US 2024/0040428 A1) in view of Kim et al. (US 2023/0199551 A1), hereinafter referenced as Kim2, in view of Sevin et al. (US 2024/0381466 A1) as applied to Claims 1, 7, & 15 above, and further in view of Chu et al. (US 2021/0211871 A1).
With regard to Claim 5, Kim-Kim2-Sevin teaches the multi-link communication method according to claim 1.
While Kim-Kim2-Sevin teaches generating a beacon frame comprising a Link Mapping Bitmap (LMB) element used to inform that there is buffered traffic for specific or all links [Kim: 0221; 0223; 0225], Kim does not teach:
wherein the first message frame comprises an association response frame, a re-association response frame, a multi-link setup response frame, or a re-multi-link setup response frame associated with a TID-to-Link mapping negotiation.
In a similar field of endeavor involving extending multi-link communications elements by adding link bitmap fields, Chu discloses:
wherein the first message frame comprises an association response frame, a re-association response frame, a multi-link setup response frame, or a re-multi-link setup response frame associated with a TID-to-Link mapping negotiation; (the frames that are used to execute multi-link operations for multiple links in the multi-link communications system 100 may be any type of frames such as probe request/response frames, association request/response frames, beacon frames and action frames, which may include fields and elements [Chu: 0047-48], wherein the frame includes per-link value information that has different values for different links of the multiple link [Chu: 0014]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Kim-Kim2-Sevin in view of Chu in order to utilize a first message frame comprising an association response frame, a re-association response frame, a multi-link setup response frame, or a re-multi-link setup response frame associated with a TID-to-Link mapping negotiation in the system of Kim-Kim2-Sevin.
One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to combine Kim-Kim2-Sevin with Chu as doing so would allow the information field comprising the Link Mapping Bitmap to be conveyed immediately in a response frame rather than periodically by a beacon frame.
With regard to Claims 11 & 22, they appear substantially similar to the limitations recited by claim 5 and consequently do not appear to teach or further define over the citations provided for said claim. Accordingly, claims 11 & 22 are rejected for the same reasons as set forth in claim 5.
Conclusion
Applicant’s amendment necessitated any new grounds 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 extension fee pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure:
Huang et al. (US 2022/0116797 A1) which teaches encoding a management frame to include an element comprising link ID bitmap information that may be included in a header portion of a management frame [Huang: 0137].
In the case of amendments, Applicant is respectfully requested to indicate the portion(s) of the specification which dictate(s) the structure relied on for proper interpretation and support, for ascertaining the metes and bounds of the claimed invention.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to AUSTIN J MOREAU whose telephone number is (571) 272-5179. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 9:00 - 6:00 ET.
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, Rebecca Song can be reached on 571-270-3667. 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.
/AUSTIN J MOREAU/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2417
Prosecution Insights