DETAILED ACTION
This office action is in reply communication filed on 04/01/2026.
Claims 2-21 are pending.
Claim Objections
Claims 2-21 are objected to because of the following informalities:
Claims 2 and 12 recited, “the packet” in line 6. For clarity, it is suggested to change to “the wireless packet”.
Claims 3-7 recited, “the receive configuration” in line 2. For clarity, it is suggested to change to “a receive configuration”.
All other dependent claims 8-11 and 13-21 are also objected since they are depended on objected claims 2 and 12.
Appropriate corrections are required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a):
(a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention.
Claims 2-3 and 12-13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for pre-AIA the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention.
Claims 2 and 12 recite limitation “wherein the information comprises at least one of: a transmitter identifier, a basic service set (BSS) color, or a resource allocation indicator”.
According to the Paragraph 194 of Specification:
[0194] The TX identification and/or BF training block 1006 may include or correspond to at least a portion of the config selection block 804 of FIG. 8. For example, the TX identification and/or BF training block 1006 may include identifying a sender node of the packet from information included in or derived from a pre-payload portion of the packet. Alternatively or additionally, the TX identification and/or BF training block 1006 may include extracting or deriving CSI and/or other information from the pre-payload portion of the packet and using the extracted and/or derived information for BF training and estimation.
In the Specification shown “the TX identification and/or BF training block 1006 may include identifying a sender node of the packet from information included in or derived from a pre-payload portion of the packet”; however, the claim recites “the information comprises at least one of: a transmitter identifier, a basic service set (BSS) color, or a resource allocation indicator.”
Therefore, claims 2 and 12 recite subject matter which was not described in the specification is failing to comply with the written description requirement.
Claims 3-4 and 13-14, refers to analysis of claims 2 and 12 above.
All other dependent claims 5-11 and 15-21 are also rejected since they are depended on rejected claims 2 and 12.
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) the invention was known or used by others in this country, or patented or described in a printed publication in this or a foreign country, before the invention thereof by the applicant for a patent.
(b) the invention was patented or described in a printed publication in this or a foreign country or in public use or on sale in this country, more than one year prior to the date of application for patent in the United States.
(e) the invention was described in (1) an application for patent, published under section 122(b), by another filed in the United States before the invention by the applicant for patent or (2) a patent granted on an application for patent by another filed in the United States before the invention by the applicant for patent, except that an international application filed under the treaty defined in section 351(a) shall have the effects for purposes of this subsection of an application filed in the United States only if the international application designated the United States and was published under Article 21(2) of such treaty in the English language.
Claims 2, 5-9, 12, 15-19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by ADACHI et al. (US 2017/0188390).
Regarding claim 1, ADACHI discloses a method [Fig. 3, 10, ¶¶ 53, 153; a method of a wireless communication device 300/ receiver of AP 11] comprising:
receiving, at a wireless receiver, a pre-payload portion of a wireless packet transmitted over a wireless medium [see Fig. 2, 3, ¶ 181; receiving the HE Preamble field of the UL-OFDMA frames from the STA], the pre-payload portion comprising one or more fields that precede a payload portion [see Fig. 2, ¶ 42, MAC frame includes a MAC header, a Frame Body field, and an FCS (Frame Check Sequence) field; see Fig. 5, ¶ 71, PHY frame includes a PHY header and a PHY payload];
extracting, from the pre-payload portion, information identifying a transmitter or communication link associated with the packet [see Fig. 5, ¶¶ 57, 190; extracting, from the PHY (Physical) header, information identifying a transmitter or communication link associated with the packet/received frame; also see ¶¶ 136-137, extracting an AID from the Duration/ID field], wherein the information comprises at least one of: a transmitter identifier, a basic service set (BSS) color, or a resource allocation indicator [see Fig. , ¶¶ 70, 74-80; wherein the information comprises: information identifiable by a plurality of STAs, BSS information, RU pattern numbers];
selecting, prior to reception of the payload portion, one or more receive parameters for the wireless receiver based on the extracted information [see Fig. 3 , ¶¶ 58, ; selecting either one of demodulation using a reception parameter specified by the MAC layer processor 330 or demodulation using a parameter included in the PHY header of a reception frame], the receive parameters comprising beamforming pattern [see Fig. , ¶¶ 116-120, 161, 163-169; the receive parameters comprising RU pattern frequency bandwidth; also ¶ 88, parameter includes information indicating a frequency bandwidth (e.g., 20 MHz or 80 MHz bandwidth)]; and
receiving and processing the payload portion of the wireless packet using the selected receive parameters [see Fig. 10, ¶ 153; if the Format parameter does not indicate UL-MU (SU is indicated), the demodulator 310 receives (demodulates) the frame using the parameter extracted from HE Preamble (S207)].
Regarding claim 5, Zaks discloses the method of claim 2.
ADACHI further discloses wherein the information identifying the transmitter or communication link comprises a resource unit (RU) allocation field in the pre-payload portion, and the receive configuration comprises configuring the receiver to demodulate only the subcarriers corresponding to the assigned RU [see Fig. 2, ¶¶ 70, 92; wherein the demodulator 310 can identify an RU boundary, thereby demodulating a received signal for each RU].
Regarding claim 6, Zaks discloses the method of claim 5.
ADACHI further discloses wherein the receive configuration further comprises selecting a number of spatial streams, modulation and coding scheme (MCS), or guard interval duration based on the RU allocation field [see ¶¶ 77, 93; PHY transmission rate information that includes an MCS (Modulation and Coding Scheme) Index indicating the transmission rate of data from the STA and the number of streams (Nsts: number of space time streams)].
Regarding claim 7, Zaks discloses the method of claim 2.
ADACHI further discloses wherein the information identifying the transmitter or communication link comprises a transmitter identifier or address field in the pre-payload portion, and the receive configuration comprises retrieving and applying a previously stored receive parameter set associated with the identified transmitter [see ¶¶ 62, 191; ID manager 333 is a processor that stores IDs (e.g., an Association ID (AID)) which are identifiers for identifying the acknowledgement information, which is generated by the response frame generator 332, for the respective STAs].
Regarding claim 8, Zaks discloses the method of claim 7.
ADACHI further discloses wherein the previously stored receive parameter set comprises at least one of: antenna sector selection, beamforming weights, polarization state, or baseband equalizer configuration, and wherein the receiver applies the parameter set prior to receiving the payload portion [see ¶¶ 162-169; the AID stored in the ID manager 1133, before the transmission of the data frame, the transmission parameter specifying unit 1131 notifies the following parameters comprises RU allocation information, RU pattern].
Regarding claim 9, Zaks discloses the method of claim 2.
ADACHI further discloses wherein the pre-payload portion comprises at least one standardized field selected from the group consisting of: legacy short training field (L-STF), legacy long training field (L-LTF), legacy signal field (L-SIG), extremely high throughput signal field (EHT-SIG), extremely high throughput short training field (EHT-STF), and extremely high throughput long training field (EHT-LTF) [see Fig. 5, ¶ ; wherein the pre-payload portion comprises at least one standardized field selected from the group consisting of: legacy short training field (L-STF), legacy long training field (L-LTF), legacy signal field (L-SIG), extremely high throughput short training field (EHT-STF), and extremely high throughput long training field (EHT-LTF)].
Regarding claims 12, 15, 16, 17, 18, and 19, the claim recites a wireless receiver, comprising: a radio frequency (RF) front end [see Fig. 3, ¶ 53; a wireless communication device 300 comprising: a radio unit corresponds to an RF integrated circuit] configured to perform the functional steps of the method recited as in claims 2, 5, 6, 7, 8, and 9 respectively; therefore, claim 12, 15, 16, 17, 18, and 19 are rejected along the same rationale that rejected in claims 2, 5, 6, 7, 8, and 9 respectively.
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 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) A patent may not be obtained though the invention is not identically disclosed or described as set forth in section 102 of this title, if the differences between the subject matter sought to be patented and the prior art are such that the subject matter as a whole would have been obvious at the time the invention was made to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which said subject matter pertains. Patentability shall not be negatived 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 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 nonobviousness.
Claims 3-4, and 13-14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 unpatentable over ADACHI et al. (US 2017/0188390) in view of Zaks et al. (US 2018/0288614).
Regarding claim 3, ADACHI discloses the method of claim 2, but does not explicitly disclose wherein the information identifying the transmitter or communication link comprises a basic service set (BSS) color field included in the pre-payload portion, and the receive configuration is selected to distinguish between intra-BSS and inter-BSS transmissions.
However, Zaks discloses wherein the information identifying the transmitter or communication link comprises a basic service set (BSS) color field included in the pre-payload portion, and the receive configuration is selected to distinguish between intra-BSS and inter-BSS transmissions [see ¶¶ 209, 256, 264; select the partition configuration from among a plurality of different partition configurations that correspond to different sets of VNFs configured from the pAP of the CPE to the vAP of the SP network based on parameter comprising a link latency, wherein the partition configuration comprises at least the RADIUS client being performed at the vAP of the SP network and a basic service set (BSS) management component at the pAP that is configured to operate a channel selection associated with a BSS identification (BSSID) of the community WiFi network].
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention was made to provide “wherein the information identifying the transmitter or communication link comprises a basic service set (BSS) color field included in the pre-payload portion, and the receive configuration is selected to distinguish between intra-BSS and inter-BSS transmissions” as taught by Zaks in the system of ADACHI, so that it would provide a guest Internet access over residential gateways (GWs) (e.g., a customer premise equipment (CPE), an access point (AP) of a CPE, a residential Access Node, residential gateway (GW), or the like) [see Zaks; ¶ 3].
Regarding claim 4, the combined system of ADACHI and Zaks discloses the method of claim 3.
ADACHI further discloses wherein the receive configuration comprises selection of a spatial reuse parameter or network allocation vector (NAV) update policy based on the BSS color [see Fig. 2, ¶¶ 40-42; wherein the configuration of a MAC (Media Access Control) frame includes a Frame Control field where values are set depending on the kind of frame, and a Duration/ID field includes a transmission deferred period (NAV: Network Allocation Vector) is set or an identification number (ID) allocated to the STA connected to the AP is set].
Regarding claims 13-14, the claim recites the wireless receiver of claim12 to perform the method steps recited as in claims 3-4 respectively; therefore, claim 13-14 are rejected along the same rationale that rejected in claims 3-4 respectively.
Claims 10 and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 unpatentable over ADACHI et al. (US 2017/0188390) in view of MUDULODU et al. (US 2019/0191373).
Regarding claim 10, ADACHI discloses the method of claim 2, but does not explicitly disclose prior to receiving the payload portion, processing the pre-payload portion to select and load one or more baseband receive parameters for the wireless receiver, the baseband receive parameters comprising at least one of: automatic gain control (AGC) setting, equalizer type, or interference rejection configuration.
However, MUDULODU discloses prior to receiving the payload portion, processing the pre-payload portion to select and load one or more baseband receive parameters for the wireless receiver, the baseband receive parameters comprising at least one of: automatic gain control (AGC) setting, equalizer type, or interference rejection configuration [see ¶¶ 53, 65; the receiver also includes a pre-amplifier, a baseband mixer, low pass filters, and analog to digital converter (ADC) with an output coupled to a preamble sensor and preamble processor, and the preamble processor delivers the extracted channel equalization and frequency offset parameters to the baseband processor for demodulating the associated packet. During the preamble sensing interval, the receiver performs automatic gain control (AGC) to place the signal into a suitable dynamic range of the ADC during the preamble interval of a received packet].
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention was made to provide “prior to receiving the payload portion, processing the pre-payload portion to select and load one or more baseband receive parameters for the wireless receiver, the baseband receive parameters comprising at least one of: automatic gain control (AGC) setting, equalizer type, or interference rejection configuration” as taught by MUDULODU in the system of ADACHI, so that it would provide improved power savings in a station operative in congested networks where the station wakes up and the expected beacon is delayed because of network congestion or interferers, and to provide an apparatus and method for reducing receiver power consumption during beacon frame reception [see MUDULODU; ¶ 3].
Regarding claim 20, the claim recites the wireless receiver of claim 12 to perform the method steps recited as in claim 10; therefore, claim 20 is rejected along the same rationale that rejected in claim 10.
Claims 11 and 21 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 unpatentable over ADACHI et al. (US 2017/0188390) in view of Erceg et al. (US 2010/0110998).
Regarding claim 11, ADACHI discloses the method of claim 2, but does not explicitly disclose wherein the one or more receive parameters selected based on the pre-payload portion comprise at least one radio frequency (RF) receive parameter, including selection of an antenna sector, beamforming pattern, or antenna polarization, prior to receiving the payload portion.
However, Erceg discloses wherein the one or more receive parameters selected based on the pre-payload portion comprise at least one radio frequency (RF) receive parameter, including selection of an antenna sector, beamforming pattern, or antenna polarization, prior to receiving the payload portion [see ¶¶ 94, 133; wherein the one or more receive parameters selected based on the pre-payload portion comprise at least one radio frequency (RF) receive parameter, including selection of an antenna sector, beamforming pattern, or antenna polarization, prior to receiving the payload portion].
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention was made to provide “wherein the one or more receive parameters selected based on the pre-payload portion comprise at least one radio frequency (RF) receive parameter, including selection of an antenna sector, beamforming pattern, or antenna polarization, prior to receiving the payload portion” as taught by Erceg in the system of ADACHI, so that it would provide adjust transmission or reception parameters to communicate efficiently to avoiding interference [see Erceg; ¶ 17].
Regarding claim 2, the claim recites the wireless receiver of claim 12 to perform the method steps recited as in claim 11; therefore, claim 21 is rejected along the same rationale that rejected in claim 11.
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 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.
In additional to references cited that are used for rejection as set forth above, SUGAYA et al. (US 2020/0178120) is also considered as relevant prior arts for rejection of in claims 2 and 12 (see Fig. 2, 3, 4, ¶¶ 97-113).
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to PHONG LA whose telephone number is (571)272-2588. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday through Friday from 7:30 A.M. to 4:00 P.M. (EST).
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, IAN MOORE can be reached on 571-272-3085. 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.
/PHONG LA/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2469
Prosecution Insights