DETAILED ACTION
This office action is a response to an application filed on 06/21/2024.
Claims 1-20 are pending for examination.
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application is being examined under the pre-AIA first to invent provisions.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) was filed. The submission is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
Drawings
The Examiner contends that the drawings submitted on 06/21/2024 are acceptable for examination proceedings.
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.
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(a) 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 non-obviousness.
Claims 1- 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Asterjadhi et al. (US 20210007168 A1), hereinafter “Asterjadhi”; and in further view of Lin et al. (US 20240407031 A1), hereinafter “Lin”.
Regarding claim 1, Asterjadhi teaches A non-access point (AP) multi-link device (MLD) comprising [Abstract teaches signaling between an access point (AP) multi-link device (MLD) and a non-AP MLD that support multi-link communication in a wireless local area network (WLAN)]:
stations (STAs), each comprising a transceiver configured to form a link with a corresponding AP of an AP MLD [Fig. 2A; Par. 121- 122 teaches shows a first link (referred to as an anchor link 132) and a second link (referred to as an auxiliary link 134) between the AP MLD 110 and the non-AP MLD 120]; and
a processor operably coupled to the STAs; the processor configured to:
determine that a coexistence operation will be caused for the non-AP MLD [Fig. 2A; Par. 121 to 122 teaches of implementing link for non-AP MLD using multi-link association]; and
generate a notification frame to transmit to the AP MLD, the notification frame indicating a start time and an end time, the notification frame notifying
wherein the transceiver is configured to transmit the notification frame to the AP MLD [Fig. 5C; Par. 135- 137 teaches he non-AP MLD 120 may periodically wake up an auxiliary link 134 to receive broadcast frames (such as Beacon Frames 410) and determine whether the Beacon Frame 410 includes an indicator].
PNG
media_image1.png
384
684
media_image1.png
Greyscale
However, Asterjadhi does not teach the AP MLD to avoid transmission to the non-AP MLD between the start time and the end time so as to avoid causing the coexistence operation for the non-AP MLD.
Nevertheless, Lin, in the similar filed of endeavor, teaches the AP MLD to avoid transmission to the non-AP MLD between the start time and the end time so as to avoid causing the coexistence operation for the non-AP MLD [Lin: Par. 14 teaches of after the EMLSR non-AP MLD sends the first frame, or after a period of time after the EMLSR non-AP MLD sends the first frame, (all links of) the EMLSR non-AP MLD is unavailable for the AP MLD associated with the EMLSR non-AP MLD; Par. 193 and 914 teaches AP MLD does not send an initial control frame on an unavailable link of the EMLSR non-AP MLD, to reduce a waste of resources].
PNG
media_image2.png
300
694
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Thus it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill at the time the invention was made to utilize the teachings of Lin to establish communication with MLD and non-AP MLD stations. One in the art would be motivated to utilize the teachings of Lin with a motivation to make this modification in order to provide multi-link device may perform parallel communication on a plurality of links (Lin: Par. 3).
Regarding claim 2, the combined Asterjadhi in view of Lin teaches all the limitations in the parent claim 1. Asterjadhi in view of Lin further teaches the coexistence operation comprises a non-simultaneous transmit and receive (NSTR) operation [Lin: Par. 7];
a first STA of the STAs comprises a tunneled direct link setup (TDLS) peer STA affiliated with the non-AP MLD [Lin: Par. 330 teaches NSTR link pair of the non-AP MLD may establish a P2P connection to a STA of another non-AP MLD or a non-AP STA (STA 3), for example, tunneled direct link setup (TDLS)]; and
when the TDLS peer STA affiliated with the non-AP MLD forms an NSTR link pair with a second STA affiliated with the non-AP MLD, the non-AP MLD is configured, before the TDLS peer STA starts transmitting a first frame over a TDLS direct link, to transmit the notification frame to the AP MLD [Lin: Par. 3 teaches The MLD includes one or more affiliated stations (affiliated STA). The affiliated station is a logical station and may operate over a link. The affiliated station may be an access point (AP) or a non-access point station (non-AP STA). In the 802.11be standard, a multi-link device whose affiliated station is an AP is referred to as an AP MLD, and a multi-link device whose affiliated station is a non-AP STA is referred to as a non-AP MLD].
Regarding claim 3, the combined Asterjadhi in view of Lin teaches all the limitations in the parent claim 1. Asterjadhi in view of Lin further teaches the coexistence operation comprises an enhanced multi-link single-radio (EMLSR) operation [Asterjadhi: Fig. 5C];
at least one of the links comprises an EMLSR link configured to operate in an EMLSR mode of operation [Lin: Abstract]; and
when a third STA of the STAs [Lin: Par. 5 teaches of EMLSR mode corresponds to different STAs] affiliated with the non-AP MLD intends to initiate a tunneled direct link setup (TDLS) process or intends to transmit a third frame over a TDLS direct link, the non-AP MLD is configured [Lin: Par. 330 teaches STA (STA 1) on an NSTR link pair of the non-AP MLD may establish a P2P connection to a STA of another non-AP MLD or a non-AP STA (STA 3), for example, tunneled direct link setup (TDLS). In this case, if the STA 1 initiates transmission to the STA 3], before the third STA initiates the TDLS process or before the third STA starts transmission over a TDLS direct link, to transmit the notification frame to the AP MLD [Asterjadhi: Fig. 5C; Par. 135- 137 teaches he non-AP MLD 120 may periodically wake up an auxiliary link 134 to receive broadcast frames (such as Beacon Frames 410) and determine whether the Beacon Frame 410 includes an indicator].
Regarding claim 4, the combined Asterjadhi in view of Lin teaches all the limitations in the parent claim 1. Asterjadhi in view of Lin further teaches the coexistence operation comprises an enhanced multi-link single-radio (EMLSR) operation [Asterjadhi: Fig. 5C];
at least one of the links comprises an EMLSR link configured to operate in an EMLSR mode of operation [Lin: Abstract]; and
when a fourth STA of the STAs [Lin: Par. 5 teaches of EMLSR mode corresponds to different STAs] affiliated with the non-AP MLD intends to initiate a tunneled direct link setup (TDLS) process or intends to transmit a fourth frame over a TDLS direct link, the non-AP MLD is configured [Lin: Par. 330 teaches STA (STA 1) on an NSTR link pair of the non-AP MLD may establish a P2P connection to a STA of another non-AP MLD or a non-AP STA (STA 3), for example, tunneled direct link setup (TDLS). In this case, if the STA 1 initiates transmission to the STA 3], before the fourth STA initiates the TDLS process or before the fourth STA starts transmission over a TDLS direct link, to transmit the notification frame to the AP MLD [Asterjadhi: Fig. 5C; Par. 135- 137 teaches he non-AP MLD 120 may periodically wake up an auxiliary link 134 to receive broadcast frames (such as Beacon Frames 410) and determine whether the Beacon Frame 410 includes an indicator].
Regarding claim 5, the combined Asterjadhi in view of Lin teaches all the limitations in the parent claim 1. Asterjadhi in view of Lin further teaches the coexistence operation comprises an enhanced multi-link single-radio (EMLSR) operation [Asterjadhi: Fig. 5C];
at least one of the links comprises an EMLSR link configured to operate in an EMLSR mode of operation [Lin: Abstract]; and
when a fifth STA of the STAs [Lin: Par. 5 teaches of EMLSR mode corresponds to different STAs] affiliated with the non-AP MLD is operating on a link that comprises an EMLSR link, the non-AP MLD is configured to transmit the notification frame to the AP MLD to avoid causing the coexistence operation for the non-AP MLD [Lin: Par. 14, 330 teaches STA (STA 1) on an NSTR link pair of the non-AP MLD may establish a P2P connection to a STA of another non-AP MLD or a non-AP STA (STA 3), for example, tunneled direct link setup (TDLS). In this case, if the STA 1 initiates transmission to the STA 3],
Regarding claim 6, the combined Asterjadhi in view of Lin teaches all the limitations in the parent claim 1. Asterjadhi in view of Lin further teaches the coexistence operation comprises an enhanced multi-link single-radio (EMLSR) operation [Asterjadhi: Fig. 5C];
at least one of the links comprises an EMLSR link configured to operate in an EMLSR mode of operation [Lin: Abstract]; and
when a sixth STA of the STAs [Lin: Par. 5 teaches of EMLSR mode corresponds to different STAs] affiliated with the non-AP MLD is operating on a link that comprises an EMLSR link, the non-AP MLD is configured to transmit the notification frame to the AP MLD to avoid causing the coexistence operation for the non-AP MLD [Lin: Par. 14, 330 teaches STA (STA 1) on an NSTR link pair of the non-AP MLD may establish a P2P connection to a STA of another non-AP MLD or a non-AP STA (STA 3), for example, tunneled direct link setup (TDLS). In this case, if the STA 1 initiates transmission to the STA 3],
Regarding claim 7, the combined Asterjadhi in view of Lin teaches all the limitations in the parent claim 1. Asterjadhi in view of Lin further teaches the coexistence operation comprises an enhanced multi-link single-radio (EMLSR) operation [Asterjadhi: Fig. 5C];
at least one of the links comprises an EMLSR link configured to operate in an EMLSR mode of operation [Lin: Abstract]; and
when a seventh STA of the STAs [Lin: Par. 5 teaches of EMLSR mode corresponds to different STAs] affiliated with the non-AP MLD is operating on a link that comprises an EMLSR link, the non-AP MLD is configured [Lin: Par. 330 teaches STA (STA 1) on an NSTR link pair of the non-AP MLD may establish a P2P connection to a STA of another non-AP MLD or a non-AP STA (STA 3), for example, tunneled direct link setup (TDLS). In this case, if the STA 1 initiates transmission to the STA 3], o transmit the notification frame to the AP MLD to avoid causing the coexistence operation for the non-AP MLD; and the notification frame is an enhanced multi-link notification frame.[Asterjadhi: Fig. 5C; Par. 135- 137 teaches he non-AP MLD 120 may periodically wake up an auxiliary link 134 to receive broadcast frames (such as Beacon Frames 410) and determine whether the Beacon Frame 410 includes an indicator].
Regarding claim 8, the combined Asterjadhi in view of Lin teaches all the limitations in the parent claim 1. Asterjadhi in view of Lin further teaches the coexistence operation comprises an enhanced multi-link single-radio (EMLSR) operation [Asterjadhi: Fig. 5C];
at least one of the links comprises an EMLSR link configured to operate in an EMLSR mode of operation [Lin: Abstract]; and
when an eighth STA of the STAs [Lin: Par. 5 teaches of EMLSR mode corresponds to different STAs] affiliated with the non-AP MLD is operating on a link that comprises an EMLSR link, the non-AP MLD is configured to transmit the notification frame to the AP MLD to avoid causing the coexistence operation for the non-AP MLD [Lin: Par. 330 teaches STA (STA 1) on an NSTR link pair of the non-AP MLD may establish a P2P connection to a STA of another non-AP MLD or a non-AP STA (STA 3), for example, tunneled direct link setup (TDLS). In this case, if the STA 1 initiates transmission to the STA 3], the notification frame is an enhanced multi-link notification frame [Asterjadhi: Fig. 5C; Par. 135- 137 teaches he non-AP MLD 120 may periodically wake up an auxiliary link 134 to receive broadcast frames (such as Beacon Frames 410) and determine whether the Beacon Frame 410 includes an indicator].
Regarding claim 9, Asterjadhi teaches A method of wireless communication performed by a non-access point (AP) multi-link device (MLD) that comprises stations (STAs), the method comprising [Abstract teaches signaling between an access point (AP) multi-link device (MLD) and a non-AP MLD that support multi-link communication in a wireless local area network (WLAN)]: forming links with corresponding AP s of an AP MLD [Fig. 2A; Par. 121- 122 teaches shows a first link (referred to as an anchor link 132) and a second link (referred to as an auxiliary link 134) between the AP MLD 110 and the non-AP MLD 120];
determining that a coexistence operation will be caused for the non-AP MLD [Fig. 2A; Par. 121 to 122 teaches of implementing link for non-AP MLD using multi-link association]; and generating a notification frame to transmit to the AP MLD, the notification frame indicating a start time and an end time, the notification frame notifying the AP MLD [Fig. 5C; Par. 135- 137 teaches he non-AP MLD 120 may periodically wake up an auxiliary link 134 to receive broadcast frames (such as Beacon Frames 410) and determine whether the Beacon Frame 410 includes an indicator].
PNG
media_image1.png
384
684
media_image1.png
Greyscale
However, Asterjadhi does not teach the AP MLD to avoid transmission to the non-AP MLD between the start time and the end time so as to avoid causing the coexistence operation for the non-AP MLD.
Nevertheless, Lin, in the similar filed of endeavor, teaches the AP MLD to avoid transmission to the non-AP MLD between the start time and the end time so as to avoid causing the coexistence operation for the non-AP MLD [Lin: Par. 14 teaches of after the EMLSR non-AP MLD sends the first frame, or after a period of time after the EMLSR non-AP MLD sends the first frame, (all links of) the EMLSR non-AP MLD is unavailable for the AP MLD associated with the EMLSR non-AP MLD; Par. 193 and 914 teaches AP MLD does not send an initial control frame on an unavailable link of the EMLSR non-AP MLD, to reduce a waste of resources].
PNG
media_image2.png
300
694
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Thus it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill at the time the invention was made to utilize the teachings of Lin to establish communication with MLD and non-AP MLD stations. One in the art would be motivated to utilize the teachings of Lin with a motivation to make this modification in order to provide multi-link device may perform parallel communication on a plurality of links (Lin: Par. 3).
Regarding claim 10, the claim is interpreted and rejected for the same reason as set forth for claim 2.
Regarding claim 11, the claim is interpreted and rejected for the same reason as set forth for claim 3.
Regarding claim 12, the claim is interpreted and rejected for the same reason as set forth for claim 4.
Regarding claim 13, the claim is interpreted and rejected for the same reason as set forth for claim 5.
Regarding claim 14, the claim is interpreted and rejected for the same reason as set forth for claim 6.
Regarding claim 15, the claim is interpreted and rejected for the same reason as set forth for claim 7.
Regarding claim 16, the claim is interpreted and rejected for the same reason as set forth for claim 8.
Regarding claim 17, the claim is interpreted and rejected for the same reason as set forth for claim 1.
Regarding claim 18, the combined Asterjadhi in view of Lin teaches all the limitations in the parent claim 17. Asterjadhi in view of Lin further teaches the coexistence operation comprises an enhanced multi-link single-radio (EMLSR) operation [Asterjadhi: Par. 81: Fig. 5C]];
at least one of the links comprises an EMLSR link configured to operate in an EMLSR mode of operation; and [Lin: Fig. 18; Par. 355- 358]; and
the AP MLD is configured to send the acknowledgement frame to the non-AP MLD over any enabled link and end downlink transmission to any STA affiliated with the non-AP MLD and operating on one of the EMLSR links [Lin: Par. 3 teaches The MLD includes one or more affiliated stations (affiliated STA). The affiliated station is a logical station and may operate over a link. The affiliated station may be an access point (AP) or a non-access point station (non-AP STA). In the 802.11be standard, a multi-link device whose affiliated station is an AP is referred to as an AP MLD, and a multi-link device whose affiliated station is a non-AP STA is referred to as a non-AP MLD].
Regarding claim 19, the combined Asterjadhi in view of Lin teaches all the limitations in the parent claim 17. Asterjadhi in view of Lin further teaches the coexistence operation comprises an enhanced multi-link multi-radio (EMLMR) operation [Lin: Par. 4];
at least one of the links comprises an EMLMR link configured to operate in an EMLMR mode of operation [Lin: Fig. 18; Par. 355- 358]; and
the AP MLD is configured to send the acknowledgement frame to the non-AP MLD over any enabled link and end downlink transmission to any STA affiliated with the non-AP MLD and operating on one of the EMLMR links [Lin: Par. 3 teaches The MLD includes one or more affiliated stations (affiliated STA). The affiliated station is a logical station and may operate over a link. The affiliated station may be an access point (AP) or a non-access point station (non-AP STA). In the 802.11be standard, a multi-link device whose affiliated station is an AP is referred to as an AP MLD, and a multi-link device whose affiliated station is a non-AP STA is referred to as a non-AP MLD].
Regarding claim 20, the combined Asterjadhi in view of Lin teaches all the limitations in the parent claim 17. Asterjadhi in view of Lin further teaches the coexistence operation comprises a non-simultaneous transmit and receive (NSTR) operation; and [Lin: Par. 7];
non-AP MLD over any enabled link and end downlink transmission to any STA affiliated with the non-AP MLD and operating on a link indicated by the notification frame. [Lin: Par. 3 teaches The MLD includes one or more affiliated stations (affiliated STA). The affiliated station is a logical station and may operate over a link. The affiliated station may be an access point (AP) or a non-access point station (non-AP STA). In the 802.11be standard, a multi-link device whose affiliated station is an AP is referred to as an AP MLD, and a multi-link device whose affiliated station is a non-AP STA is referred to as a non-AP MLD].
Conclusion
The prior art made of record (see attached PTO-892) and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
A shortened statutory period for reply to this action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of the action. An extension of time may be obtained under 37 CFR 1.136(a). However, in no event, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to KYAW Z SOE whose telephone number is (571)270-0304. The examiner can normally be reached on 9am-5pm.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Charles C Jiang can be reached on 5712707191. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/KYAW Z SOE/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2412
Prosecution Insights