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 .
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 8-12 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Asterjadhi et al. (US Publication 2018/0115950 A1).
In regards to claim 8, Asterjadhi et al. (US Publication 2018/0115950 A1) teaches, a method, comprising: providing, a basic service set (BSS) (see paragraph 54; the AP typically has better knowledge of surroundings and congestion within its own BSS); and transmitting a broadcast (BC) target-wake-time (TWT) parameter set for the BSS, wherein the BC TWT indicates a service period (SP) (see figure 5 step 502; see paragraph 59; at 502, by obtaining one or more first frames from a wireless node that, collectively, include a set of parameters defining at least one broadcast target wake-up time (TWT) schedule and an assignment of the apparatus to at least one TWT group to be serviced in TWT service periods (SPs) associated with the at least one broadcast TWT schedule) during which the BSS will be unavailable via at least one link (see paragraph 60; during each TWT service period (SP), an AP may indicate which STAs will be serviced (or not serviced), which may allow STAs that are not being serviced to re-enter or return to a low power (or otherwise unavailable) state or some other state where the STAs are not available (e.g., STAs re-entering a low power state). The techniques described herein generally allow a STA to know if it is to be serviced in a TWT SP so it may know whether to remain available or otherwise return to an unavailable state during the TWT SP).
In regards to claim 9, Asterjadhi teaches, wherein the BC TWT parameter set is transmitted in a channel usage request frame (see paragraph 66; the AP may obtain a second frame that indicates a request from a STA (requesting) to change a TWT group assignment or a change to the preferred wake-up time of the STA. In such cases, the AP may assign the STA to a TWT group based on the request or re-assign the STA to another TWT group based on the change to the preferred wake-up schedule).
In regards to claim 10, Asterjadhi teaches, wherein the BC TWT parameter set is transmitted in a channel usage response frame (see paragraph 68; a TWT information element (IE) or some other element/field may indicate a range of AIDs (e.g., by including Start AID and End AID fields in the Broadcast TWT IE) for each TWT Parameter Set).
In regards to claim 11, Asterjadhi teaches wherein the BC TWT parameter set is transmitted in association with a first indication of one or more links which will be unavailable during the SP (see paragraph 60; allow a STA to know if it is to be serviced in a TWT SP so it may know whether to remain available or otherwise return to an unavailable state during the TWT SP; see paragraph 66; the AP may obtain a second frame that indicates a request from a STA (requesting) to change a TWT group assignment or a change to the preferred wake-up time of the STA).
In regards to claim 12, Asterjadhi teaches, further comprising: receiving, during the SP via a first link that is available during the SP, a request to make a second link available for at least a portion of the remainder of the SP, wherein the first indication indicates the second link as unavailable during the SP (see paragraph 66; the AP may obtain a second frame that indicates a request from a STA (requesting) to change a TWT group assignment or a change to the preferred wake-up time of the STA.); and activating, in response to the request, the second link for the portion of the remainder of the SP (see paragraph 66; In such cases, the AP may assign the STA to a TWT group based on the request or re-assign the STA to another TWT group based on the change to the preferred wake-up schedule).
Claim(s) 13 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Chay et al. (US Publication 2018/0324618 A1).
In regards to claim 13, Chay et al. (US Publication 2018/0324618 A1) teaches, a processor comprising memory configured to cause the processor to perform operations comprising: generating a wireless local area network (WLAN) communication with an access point (AP) (see figure 4, communication with the AP); determining coexistence information related to the WLAN communication, the coexistence information (see paragraph 32; an unsolicited collocated interference reporting and physical layer parameter control system may determine collocated interference (e.g., LTE and/or Bluetooth) at a Wi-Fi station (STA) (e.g., the one or more user devices 120) and may allow for the uplink communication of unsolicited collocated interference reports and physical layer (PHY) parameters (e.g., transmission power) even when the STA can support multiple communications standards that may cause interference (e.g., in-device coexistence)) comprising at least one of: information related to a clock drift; information related to an interference level of a co-located radio (see paragraph 32; an unsolicited collocated interference reporting and physical layer parameter control system may determine collocated interference (e.g., LTE and/or Bluetooth) at a Wi-Fi station (STA) (e.g., the one or more user devices 120) and may allow for the uplink communication of unsolicited collocated interference reports and physical layer (PHY) parameters (e.g., transmission power) even when the STA can support multiple communications standards that may cause interference (e.g., in-device coexistence)); detailed timing information associated with one or more coexistence events; or channel mapping information; encoding, for transmission to the AP, an indication of the coexistence information (see paragraph 32; the one or more user devices 120 may be configured to encode an information element (e.g., IE 104) to enable the sending of an unsolicited frame (e.g., frame 106) that includes an indication of a collocated interference report and/or preferred uplink (UL) PHY parameters over specific frames that will be triggered by an AP (e.g., AP 102)) and generating a communication, intended for the AP, according to the coexistence information (paragraph 32 also reads on the generating of the frame for transmission to AP; also see figure 4 step 414).
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.
Claim(s) 14 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chay as stated above further in view of Sun et al. (US Publication 20160295538 A1).
In regards to claim 14, Chay teaches all the limitations of parent claim as stated above.
However, Chay fails to teach, wherein the coexistence information comprises the information related to the clock drift, wherein the indication of the coexistence information comprises one or more periodic timing updates.
Sun et al. (US Publication 20160295538 A1) teaches, wherein the coexistence information comprises the information related to the clock drift, wherein the indication of the coexistence information comprises one or more periodic timing updates (see paragraph 72 and figure 4; use of a guard interval G to manage clock drift D for communications with a STA having coexisting radios; see paragraph 76; the difference between the clock drift D and the guard interval G satisfies a predetermined threshold (e.g., is less than the threshold) for the scheduled Rx/Tx interval 455. Thus, after the scheduled Rx/Tx interval 455, the STA may send an ATS frame 460 (followed by a corresponding ACK frame 465 from the AP) for resynchronization. For example, the ATS frame 460 may include an update to the timing of a subsequent scheduled Rx/Tx interval 470 (as well as others, not shown). Again, the guard interval(s) for the subsequent scheduled Rx/Tx interval 470).
Sun and Chay both relate to coexistence in a wireless environment.
Therefore, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the present application to incorporate the use the guard interval as taught by Sun into the teachings of Chay. The motivation to do so would be to improve synchronization by preventing data packet form overlapping and colliding due to a lack of synching between transmitter and receiver.
15. The processor of claim 14, wherein the one or more periodic timing updates are encoded using one of the following: a target wake time (TWT) information frame; an action frame for clock synchronization; a frame with an A-Control field included in a media access control (MAC) header; or a block-acknowledgement frame.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 1-7 are allowed.
The following is an examiner’s statement of reasons for allowance: In regards to claim 1, the cited prior art fails to teach either individually or in combination, the channel usage preference determination, the encoding of the channel usage request, the decoding of the usage response indicating a TWT element and the determination of the schedule and the modification of the schedule as claimed.
Claims 15-20 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: in regards to the claims, the cited prior art fails to reasonably teach, the encoding of the periodic timing updates as claimed and receiving a RTS message form the AP during the uncertainty window related to clock drift and sending a CTS messages in response to the RTS. The cited prior art also fails to reasonably teach, the detailed timing information of the one or more coexistence event, wherein the detailed timing information of the one or more coexistence events comprises: dividing a first service period of reduced availability for communication with the AP associated with the one or more coexistence events into a plurality of segments, wherein a first segment is for transmission and a second segment is for reception, wherein the coexistence information comprises the channel mapping information, wherein the channel mapping information comprises an indication of a recommended channel puncture associated with a coexistence event and wherein the coexistence information comprises the channel mapping information, wherein the channel mapping information comprises an indication of a recommended secondary channel associated with a coexistence event.
Prior art Swartz et al. (US Publication 2024/0163863 A1) teaches with respect to figure 6, the non-AP STA 604 can assist with mode coordination for the P2P STA 606 and the AP 602. For example, the non-AP STA 604 can orchestrate communication between the P2P STA 606 and the AP 602 by forwarding mode coordination signals. Assume the P2P STA 606 needs to transmit a mode coordination signal to the AP 602 (e.g., a “Next PPDU End-time preference” signal as discussed above in relation to FIG. 5). As illustrated, the P2P STA 606 can use the non-AP STA 604 to forward the mode coordination signal to the AP 602. The P2P STA 606 transmits an STA mode coordination signal 612 to the non-AP STA 604. The non-AP STA 604 forwards the STA mode coordination signal 612 to the AP 602, and the AP undertakes appropriate scheduling 620 (e.g., end of PPDU matching)
Any comments considered necessary by applicant must be submitted no later than the payment of the issue fee and, to avoid processing delays, should preferably accompany the issue fee. Such submissions should be clearly labeled “Comments on Statement of Reasons for Allowance.”
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JAY P PATEL whose telephone number is (571)272-3086. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9:30-6.
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, Faruk Hamza can be reached at 571-272-8786. 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.
/JAY P PATEL/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2466
Prosecution Insights