Detailed Action
The office action is in response to the communications filed on 06/30/2026.
Notice of 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 .
Claims Status
Claims 3-6 have been canceled.
Claims 1 and 10 have been amended.
Claims 1-2 and 7-10 are pending in this application.
Prior Art Made of Record
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Fang et al. (Publication No. US 2020/0287664), the prior art discloses the STA may include information about MAP transmission in the MAP-CTS to trigger the MAP transmissions immediately, such as a preferred MAP transmission type: Selective MAP transmission or Joint MAP transmission; a MAP transmission switch reservation for joint MAP transmission; a HARQ re-transmission type: HARQ or non-HARQ Chase Combining (CC), or Incremental Redundancy (IR); the identities of APs in the MAP-G; a RSSI measurement; preferred down link transmission power on the operating channel; a requested transmit time, etc; see ¶ 51.
Response to Arguments
35 USC § 112(b)
Regarding claims 1 and 10, Applicant remarks, filed on 06/30/2026, submits that the "fourth field" is clear based of the present specification. For example, paragraph [0185] of the present specification discloses that "a Per AP Info field for setting information of each AP is provided, and Per STA Info field that is information of each STA is set in the Per AP Info field". Examiner respectfully notes that the features upon which applicant relies (i.e., “Per AP Info field for each AP/STA”) are not recited in the rejected claim(s). Although the claims are interpreted in light of the specification, limitations from the specification are not read into the claims. See In re Van Geuns, 988 F.2d 1181, 26 USPQ2d 1057 (Fed. Cir. 1993).
In addition, Applicant submits that “the number of fields involved in the switching operation is at least two”, because “a field in which the information indicating the control type is set before the switching operation and a field in which the information indicating the control type is set after the switching operation”. Examiner respectfully notes the broadest reasonable interpretation (BRI) of the frame can be that the frame includes more fields between the first fields and the fourth field, because the ordinal terms such as “first”, “second”, “third”, etc., in the claims is for description, it does not by itself connote any order or relationship.
For these reasons discussed above the claim is indefinite.
35 USC § 102
Regarding claim 1 Applicant remarks, filed on 06/30/2026, submit that the cited portion of the prior art, individually or in combination, fails to discloses the features in claim 1, specifically: “wherein information indicating the control type is contained in a frame of the control information and is set in at least one of a first field in which information common to a plurality of the communication apparatuses is set, a second field in which information of each of base stations is set, a third field in which information of each of terminals is set, or a fourth field in which information of each of the terminals is set in a field in which information of each of the base stations is set, and wherein the control circuit, in operation, switches a field in which the information indicating the control type is set, among the first field to the fourth field". Examiner respectfully notes that these limitations are addressed under the 35 U.S.C. 112(b) rejection.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 1-2 and 7-10 would be allowable if rewritten to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), 2nd paragraph, set forth in this Office action and to include all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
Claims 1-2 and 7-10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
Regarding Claims 1 and 10, the claim recites:
“a fourth field in which information of each of the terminals is set in a field in which information of each of the base stations is set”. Based on the context of the claim, it is ambiguous whether the fourth field is information associated with the terminal or the base station. In addition, the claim recites: “wherein the control circuit switches a field in which the information indicating the control 5 type is set, among the first field to the fourth field”.
“wherein the control circuit, in operation, switches a field in which the information indicating the control type is set, among the first field to the fourth field”. Based on the context of the claim, it is ambiguous whether the switching operation entails more than four fields or less than four fields. Furthermore, it is ambiguous whether switching a field comprises using the value of another field to overwrite the current values of the field or modifying the frame structure by swapping another field length (e.g. number of bits) with the field. As a result, the claim is indefinite.
Regarding Claims 2 and 7-9, the claims are rejected as they inherited the deficiencies of the parent claim and have not resolved the deficiencies. Therefore, they are rejected based on the same rationale as applied to the parent claim above.
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 Hector Reyes (Hector.Reyes@uspto.gov) whose telephone number is (571) 270-0239. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 6-5.
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, Kevin Bates (Kevin.Bates@uspto.gov) can be reached on (571) 270-0239. 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.
/H.R/Examiner, Art Unit 2472
/KEVIN T BATES/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2472
Prosecution Insights