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 .
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 08/12/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. The Applicant argues that the cited references do not disclose that a fist STA as a sensing responder, the AP as a sensing initiator, the SR2SR sensing signal and wherein the trigger frame is transmitted from the AP that is the SI. The Examiner respectfully disagrees.
Trainin is cited to disclose receiving, by a first station (STA) as a sensing responder (SR) from an access point (AP) as a sensing initiator (SI) information indicating at least one of a sensing transmitter role or a sensing receiver role for the first STA. For example, Trainin discloses that various parameters are negotiated between an AP and STAs, wherein a sensing parameter may be a role assigned to the responder devices, the roles can be a transmitting device role, a receiving device role or both; see at least paragraphs 0094, 0098-0099 and 0175. Furthermore, in some implementations, the initiator device is an AP; see at least paragraphs 0012 and 0019. Furthermore, Trainin discloses wherein the trigger frame is transmitted from the AP that is the SI to at least one of the first STA that is a first SR or the second STA that is a second SR. For example, in Trainin, the AP may transmit a TF sensing trigger frame to the STAs; see at least paragraphs 0107-0108.
Chen is cited to disclose based on a STA being indicated as the sensing receiver in a trigger frame (TF) sounding for a first time period, receiving, by the STA from a second STA, an SR-to-SR (SR2SR) sensing signal, and based on the STA being indicated as the sensing transmitter in the TF sounding for a second time period, transmitting, by the first STA to the second STA, the SR2SR sensing signal, wherein the SR2SR sensing signal transmission is solicited by the trigger frame. For example, Chen discloses if a sensing initiator STA is a sensing receiver, the AP sends a trigger frame to the other STAs to trigger them to send sensing PPDUs and if the sensing initiator is a sensing transmitter, it transmits PPDUs; see at least Fig. 2 and paragraphs 0042-0046. It appears that the Applicant is arguing the references individually. The Applicant is reminded that one cannot show nonobviousness by attacking references individually where the rejections are based on combinations of references. See In re Keller, 642 F.2d 413, 208 USPQ 871 (CCPA 1981); In re Merck & Co., 800 F.2d 1091,231 USPQ 375 (Fed. Cir. 1986).
Claims 1, 5-7, 9 and 11-15 have been amended and claims 2-4, 8 and 10 have been canceled.
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, 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, 5-7, 9 and 11-15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Trainin (US 2023/0009140) in view of Chen (US 2022/0150962).
Regarding claim 1, Trainin discloses a method comprising:
receiving, by a first station (STA) as a sensing responder (SR) from an access point (AP) as a sensing initiator (SI) information indicating at least one of a sensing transmitter role or a sensing receiver role for the first STA (various parameters are negotiated between an AP and STAs, wherein a sensing parameter may be a role assigned to the responder devices, the roles can be a transmitting device role, a receiving device role or both; see at least paragraphs 0094, 0098-0099 and 0175. Furthermore, in some implementations, the initiator device is an AP; see at least paragraphs 0012 and 0019);
wherein the trigger frame is transmitted from the AP that is the SI to at least one of the first STA that is a first SR or the second STA that is a second SR (the AP may transmit a TF sensing trigger frame to the STAs; see at least paragraphs 0107-0108).
Trainin discloses the first and second STAs, the APA and the trigger frame; as above, but is not clear about based on a STA being indicated as the sensing receiver in a trigger frame (TF) sounding for a first time period, receiving, by the STA from a second STA, an SR-to-SR (SR2SR) sensing signal, and based on the STA being indicated as the sensing transmitter in the TF sounding for a second time period, transmitting, by the first STA to the second STA, the SR2SR sensing signal, wherein the SR2SR sensing signal transmission is solicited by the trigger frame.
Chen discloses the above missing limitation; if a sensing initiator STA is a sensing receiver, the AP sends a trigger frame to the other STAs to trigger them to send sensing PPDUs and if the sensing initiator is a sensing transmitter, it transmits PPDUs; see at least Fig. 2 and paragraphs 0042-0046.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to modify Trainin by the teachings of Chen by having the above limitations so to be enable peer-to-peer Wi-Fi sensing; see at least the Abstract.
Regarding claim 5, Trainin in view of Chen disclose the method of Claim 1, wherein:
a session setup is performed pairwise between the sensing initiator and each STA belonging to a STA group (Trainin; see at least paragraphs 0047-0048, 0101 and 0122 and Chen; see at least Fig. 2 and paragraphs 0042-0046).
Regarding claim 6, Trainin in view of Chen disclose the method of Claim 5, wherein:
a group key for the STA group is provided through a security link between the sensing initiator and each STA (Trainin; see at least paragraph 0101 and 0122).
Regarding claim 7, Trainin in view of Chen disclose the method of Claim 6, wherein:
at least one group key for at least one STA group is provided to the first STA (Trainin; see at least paragraph 0101 and 0122).
Regarding claim 9, Trainin in view of Chen disclose the method of Claim 1, wherein:
the SR2SR sensing signal is a null data physical layer protocol data unit (NDP) based on a single user (SU) physical layer protocol data unit (PPDU) format (Trainin; see at least paragraphs 0047, 0127 and 0160 and Chen; see at least paragraphs 0024 and 0045).
Regarding claim 11, Trainin in view of Chen disclose the method of Claim 1, wherein:
a sensing measurement result of the first STA for a channel between the second STA and the first STA based on the SR2SR sensing signal received from the second STA is reported to the AP (Trainin; see at least paragraphs 0107-0112).
Regarding claim 12, Trainin in view of Chen disclose the method of Claim 11, wherein:
the sensing measurement result is reported based on a trigger from the AP (Trainin; see at least paragraphs 0107-0112).
Claims 13-15 are rejected on the same grounds as claim 1.
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. 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 YASSIN ALATA whose telephone number is (571)270-5683. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri 7-4 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, Nasser Goodarzi can be reached at 571-272-4195. 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.
/YASSIN ALATA/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2426
Prosecution Insights