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 .
Information Disclosure Statement
Applicant’s Information Disclosure Statements, filed from 07/31/2024; 02/11/2025; 12/05/2025 have been received, and entered into the record. However, it is impractical for the examiner to review the references thoroughly with the number of references cited in this case. By initializing each of the cited references on the accompanying 1449 forms, the examiner is merely acknowledging the submission of the cited references and indicating that only a cursory review has been made of the cited references.
MPEP § 2004.13 states: It is desirable to avoid the submission of long lists of documents if it can be avoided. Eliminate clearly irrelevant and marginally pertinent cumulative information. If a long list is submitted, highlight those documents which have been specifically brought to applicant’s attention and/or are known to be of most significance. See Penn Yan Boats, Inc. v. Sea Lark Boats, Inc., 359 F. Supp. 948, 175 USPQ 260 (S.D. Fla. 1972), aft'd, 479 F.2d 1338, 178 USPQ 577 (Sth Cir. 1973), cert, denied, 414 U.S. 874 (1974). But cf. Molins PLC v. Textron Inc., 48 F.3d 1172, 33 USPQ2d 1823 (Fed. Cir. 1995).
Further, it should be noted that an applicant’s duty of disclosure of material and information is not satisfied by presenting a patent examiner with "a mountain of largely irrelevant material from which he is presumed to have been able, with his experience and with adequate time, to have found the critical [material]. It ignores the real world conditions under which examiners work." Rohm & Haas Co. v. Crystal Chemical co., 722 F.2d 1556, 1573 [220 USPQ 289] (Fed. Cir. 1983), cert. Denied, 469 U.S. 851 (1984). Patent applicant has a duty not just to disclose pertinent prior art references but to make a disclosure in such a way as not to "bury" it within other disclosures of less relevant prior art; see Golden Valley Microwave Foods Inc. v. Weaver Popcorn Co. Inc., 24 USPQ2d 180i (N~D. Ind. 1992); Molins PLC v. Textron Inc., 26 USPQ2d 1889, at 1899 (D.Del 1992); Penn Yan Boats, Inc. v. Sea Lark Boats, Inc. eta!., 175 USPQ 260, at 272 (S.D. FI. 1972).
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.
The factual inquiries 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.
Claim(s) 1, 2, 3, 9, 10, 11, 17, 18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over SEOK (US 20120087300) in view of LEE et al. (US 20180084478).
Regarding claims 1, 9, SEOK (US 20120087300) teaches a method of wireless communication performed by a wireless device (STA), the method comprising:
receiving, from a source node, an indication of relay capabilities for multi-traffic transmission (fig. 2, 3, par. 35, 39, 40, 46, 47, 50, 53, a cooperative direct link setup (C-DLS) mechanism in which, when an AP transmits a plurality of frames to a destination STA, an STA cooperative to frame transmission of the AP receives some of the plurality of frames to be transmitted to the destination STA and transmits the received frames through a direct link (DL)… Upon receiving the relay request message 231, the relay STA 250 transmits a DLS request message 251 for DL setup to the destination STA 270 indicated by the relay request message 231); and
relaying the message to a destination node (fig. 2, 3, par. 43, 50, PPDU A1, PPDU A2, The AP can transmit the SDMA data frame 302 to the STA1 310 and the STA2 320 by utilizing all available PHY interfaces, and can transmit a PPDU B1 304 to an STA3 330. While the AP transmits the PPDU B1 304 to the STA3 330, the STA1 310 can transmit the PPDU A2 to the STA2 320 through the DL (as indicated by 302-3)).
However, SEOK does not explicitly teach receiving a message from the source node indicating that the message is for relay operations.
But, LEE et al. (US 20180084478) in a similar or same field of endeavor teaches receiving a message from the source node indicating that the message is for relay operations (par. 107, The indication may include one bit indication which denotes whether the received data (or associated data) is required to be relayed by the relay UE).
Thus, it would have been obvious to the person of ordinary skill in the art before the effectively filing date of the claimed invention to implement the system or method as taught by LEE in the system of SEOK to indicate relay the message.
The motivation would have been to direct management of the message relay in wireless network and able to reduce the traffic on the network cause by relay.
Regarding claims 2, 10, SEOK (US 20120087300) teaches the method of Claim 1, wherein the message comprises a first message and a second message (fig. 2, 3, table 1, par. 43, 50, 62, 63, PPDU A1, PPDU A2, The AP can transmit the SDMA data frame 302 to the STA1 310 and the STA2 320 by utilizing all available PHY interfaces, and can transmit a PPDU B1 304 to an STA3 330. While the AP transmits the PPDU B1 304 to the STA3 330, the STA1 310 can transmit the PPDU A2 to the STA2 320 through the DL (as indicated by 302-3)), the first message including information intended for the wireless device and the second message is for relay operations (fig. 2, 3, table 1, par. 43, 50, 62, 63, PPDU A1, PPDU A2, The AP can transmit the SDMA data frame 302 to the STA1 310 and the STA2 320 by utilizing all available PHY interfaces, and can transmit a PPDU B1 304 to an STA3 330. While the AP transmits the PPDU B1 304 to the STA3 330, the STA1 310 can transmit the PPDU A2 to the STA2 320 through the DL (as indicated by 302-3)), the method further comprising:
accessing the first message including the information intended for the wireless device (fig. 2, 3, table 1, par. 43, 50, 62, 63, PPDU A1, PPDU A2, The AP can transmit the SDMA data frame 302 to the STA1 310 and the STA2 320 by utilizing all available PHY interfaces, and can transmit a PPDU B1 304 to an STA3 330. While the AP transmits the PPDU B1 304 to the STA3 330, the STA1 310 can transmit the PPDU A2 to the STA2 320 through the DL (as indicated by 302-3));
relaying the second message to the destination node (fig. 2, 3, table 1, par. 43, 50, 62, 63, PPDU A1, PPDU A2, The AP can transmit the SDMA data frame 302 to the STA1 310 and the STA2 320 by utilizing all available PHY interfaces, and can transmit a PPDU B1 304 to an STA3 330. While the AP transmits the PPDU B1 304 to the STA3 330, the STA1 310 can transmit the PPDU A2 to the STA2 320 through the DL (as indicated by 302-3)).
However, SEOK does not explicitly teach the second message including an indication that the second message is for relay operations; based on the indication that the second message is for relay operations, relaying the second message to the destination node;
But, LEE et al. (US 20180084478) in a similar or same field of endeavor teaches the second message including an indication that the second message is for relay operations (par. 107, The indication may include one bit indication which denotes whether the received data (or associated data) is required to be relayed by the relay UE); based on the indication that the second message is for relay operations, relaying the second message to the destination node (par. 107, The indication may include one bit indication which denotes whether the received data (or associated data) is required to be relayed by the relay UE).
Thus, it would have been obvious to the person of ordinary skill in the art before the effectively filing date of the claimed invention to implement the system or method as taught by LEE in the system of SEOK to indicate relay the message.
The motivation would have been to direct management of the message relay in wireless network and able to reduce the traffic on the network cause by relay.
Regarding claims 3, 11, SEOK (US 20120087300) teaches the method of Claim 2, wherein accessing the first message including the information intended for the wireless device comprises using aggregate medium access control (MAC) service data unit (A-MSDU) encapsulation (fig. 6, table 1, par. 60, A-MSDU).
Regarding claim 17, SEOK (US 20120087300) teaches a source node comprising:
a transceiver (fig. 2, 3, par. 35, 39, 40, 46, 47, 50, 53, AP or STA); and
a processor operably coupled to the transceiver (fig. 2, 3, par. 35, 39, 40, 46, 47, 50, 53, AP or STA), the processor configured to:
send an indication of relay capabilities for multi-traffic transmission to a wireless device (fig. 2, 3, par. 35, 39, 40, 46, 47, 50, 53, a cooperative direct link setup (C-DLS) mechanism in which, when an AP transmits a plurality of frames to a destination STA, an STA cooperative to frame transmission of the AP receives some of the plurality of frames to be transmitted to the destination STA and transmits the received frames through a direct link (DL)… Upon receiving the relay request message 231, the relay STA 250 transmits a DLS request message 251 for DL setup to the destination STA 270 indicated by the relay request message 231); and
send the message to a destination node (fig. 2, 3, par. 43, 50, PPDU A1, PPDU A2, The AP can transmit the SDMA data frame 302 to the STA1 310 and the STA2 320 by utilizing all available PHY interfaces, and can transmit a PPDU B1 304 to an STA3 330. While the AP transmits the PPDU B1 304 to the STA3 330, the STA1 310 can transmit the PPDU A2 to the STA2 320 through the DL (as indicated by 302-3)).
However, SEOK does not explicitly teach send a message to the wireless device indicating that the message is for relay operations.
But, LEE et al. (US 20180084478) in a similar or same field of endeavor teaches send a message to the wireless device indicating that the message is for relay operations (par. 107, The indication may include one bit indication which denotes whether the received data (or associated data) is required to be relayed by the relay UE).
Thus, it would have been obvious to the person of ordinary skill in the art before the effectively filing date of the claimed invention to implement the system or method as taught by LEE in the system of SEOK to indicate relay the message.
The motivation would have been to direct management of the message relay in wireless network and able to reduce the traffic on the network cause by relay.
Regarding claim 18, SEOK (US 20120087300) teaches the source node of Claim 17, wherein the message comprises a first message and a second message (fig. 2, 3, table 1, par. 43, 50, 62, 63, PPDU A1, PPDU A2, The AP can transmit the SDMA data frame 302 to the STA1 310 and the STA2 320 by utilizing all available PHY interfaces, and can transmit a PPDU B1 304 to an STA3 330. While the AP transmits the PPDU B1 304 to the STA3 330, the STA1 310 can transmit the PPDU A2 to the STA2 320 through the DL (as indicated by 302-3)), the first message including information intended for the wireless device and the second message including information intended for a destination node (fig. 2, 3, table 1, par. 43, 50, 62, 63, PPDU A1, PPDU A2, The AP can transmit the SDMA data frame 302 to the STA1 310 and the STA2 320 by utilizing all available PHY interfaces, and can transmit a PPDU B1 304 to an STA3 330. While the AP transmits the PPDU B1 304 to the STA3 330, the STA1 310 can transmit the PPDU A2 to the STA2 320 through the DL (as indicated by 302-3)).
Claim(s) 4, 6, 8, 12, 14, 16, 19, 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over SEOK (US 20120087300) and LEE et al. (US 20180084478) as applied to claims 1, 2, 9, 10 above, and further in view of CHERIAN et al. (US 20240389139).
Regarding claims 4, 12, SEOK does not teach the method of Claim 2, wherein accessing the first message including the information intended for the wireless device comprises using aggregate medium access control (MAC) protocol data unit (A-MPDU) encapsulation.
But, CHERIAN et al. (US 20240389139) in a similar or same field of endeavor teaches wherein accessing the first message including the information intended for the wireless device comprises using aggregate medium access control (MAC) protocol data unit (A-MPDU) encapsulation (par. 85, A-MPDU).
Thus, it would have been obvious to the person of ordinary skill in the art before the effectively filing date of the claimed invention to implement the system or method as taught by CHERIAN in the system of SEOK and LEE to relay the A-MPDU.
The motivation would have been to improve the resilient of the transmission.
Regarding claims 6, 14, SEOK does not teach the method of Claim 1, wherein relaying the message to the destination node comprises transmitting the message to the destination node in a transmit opportunity (TXOP) shared with the source node.
But, CHERIAN et al. (US 20240389139) in a similar or same field of endeavor teaches wherein relaying the message to the destination node comprises transmitting the message to the destination node in a transmit opportunity (TXOP) shared with the source node (par. 42, 85, TXOP sharing may be associated with (such as in parallel, or otherwise be used in combination with) an end-to-end channel reservation scheme according to which the various wireless communication devices along the multi-hop relay path may protect end-to-end communication).
Thus, it would have been obvious to the person of ordinary skill in the art before the effectively filing date of the claimed invention to implement the system or method as taught by CHERIAN in the system of SEOK and LEE to relay the message within the TXOP.
The motivation would have been to improve the resilient of the transmission.
Regarding claims 8, 16, SEOK does not teach the method of Claim 1, further comprising negotiating a transmit opportunity (TXOP) sharing with the source node for multi-traffic multiplexing, wherein negotiating the TXOP sharing further comprises notifying the source node about relay transmission with multi-traffic.
But, CHERIAN et al. (US 20240389139) in a similar or same field of endeavor teaches further comprising negotiating a transmit opportunity (TXOP) sharing with the source node for multi-traffic multiplexing (par. 42, 43), wherein negotiating the TXOP sharing further comprises notifying the source node about relay transmission with multi-traffic (par. 42, 43, 85, To facilitate communication along a multi-hop relay path within a single TXOP, a client device or the root AP (or any other downstream or upstream wireless communication device along the multi-hop relay path) may share a TXOP with the satellite AP to provide the satellite AP with channel access. In some aspects, such TXOP sharing may be associated with (such as in parallel, or otherwise be used in combination with) an end-to-end channel reservation scheme according to which the various wireless communication devices along the multi-hop relay path may protect end-to-end communication).
Thus, it would have been obvious to the person of ordinary skill in the art before the effectively filing date of the claimed invention to implement the system or method as taught by CHERIAN in the system of SEOK and LEE to relay the message within the TXOP.
The motivation would have been to improve the resilient of the transmission.
Regarding claim 19, SEOK does not teach the source node of Claim 17, wherein the processor is further configured to negotiate a transmit opportunity (TXOP) sharing with the source node for multi-traffic multiplexing.
But, CHERIAN et al. (US 20240389139) in a similar or same field of endeavor teaches wherein the processor is further configured to negotiate a transmit opportunity (TXOP) sharing with the source node for multi-traffic multiplexing (par. 42, 85, TXOP sharing may be associated with (such as in parallel, or otherwise be used in combination with) an end-to-end channel reservation scheme according to which the various wireless communication devices along the multi-hop relay path may protect end-to-end communication).
Thus, it would have been obvious to the person of ordinary skill in the art before the effectively filing date of the claimed invention to implement the system or method as taught by CHERIAN in the system of SEOK and LEE to relay the message within the TXOP.
The motivation would have been to improve the resilient of the transmission.
Regarding claim 20, SEOK does not teach the source node of Claim 19, wherein to negotiate the TXOP sharing, the processor is further configured to receive a notification from the wireless device about relay transmission with multi-traffic.
But, CHERIAN et al. (US 20240389139) in a similar or same field of endeavor teaches wherein to negotiate the TXOP sharing, the processor is further configured to receive a notification from the wireless device about relay transmission with multi-traffic (par. 42, 43, 85, the satellite AP may transmit (such as forward or relay), to the first wireless communication device, the BA received from the second wireless communication to enable the first wireless communication device to select, identify, decide, or determine whether to retransmit any PDUs…the BA that the satellite AP transmits to the first wireless communication device may indicate which PDUs the satellite AP was able to deliver within the TXOP (regardless of whether the PDUs were successfully delivered to the second wireless communication device via an initial transmission attempt or a retransmission attempt)).
Thus, it would have been obvious to the person of ordinary skill in the art before the effectively filing date of the claimed invention to implement the system or method as taught by CHERIAN in the system of SEOK and LEE to relay the message within the TXOP.
The motivation would have been to improve the resilient of the transmission.
Claim(s) 5, 13 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over SEOK (US 20120087300) and LEE et al. (US 20180084478) as applied to claims 1, 9 above, and further in view of ELSHAFIE et al. (US 20230254887).
Regarding claims 5, 13, SEOK does not teach the method of Claim 1, wherein relaying the message to the destination node comprises using a decode-and-forward relaying operation or an amplify-and-forward relaying operation.
But, ELSHAFIE et al. (US 20230254887) in a similar or same field of endeavor teaches wherein relaying the message to the destination node comprises using a decode-and-forward relaying operation or an amplify-and-forward relaying operation (par. 70, amplify-and-forward (AF) relaying… decode-and-forward (DF) relaying in order to relay the two or more TBs).
Thus, it would have been obvious to the person of ordinary skill in the art before the effectively filing date of the claimed invention to implement the system or method as taught by ELSHAFIE in the system of SEOK and LEE to relay the message.
The motivation would have been to maintain and improve the signals.
Claim(s) 7, 15 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over SEOK (US 20120087300) and LEE et al. (US 20180084478) as applied to claims 1, 9 above, and further in view of INOHIZA (US 20260006594 with foreign app. JP 2023-048715 filed on 03/24/2023).
Regarding claims 7, 15, SEOK does not teach the method of Claim 1, wherein, when the destination node is out of range of a coverage area of the source node, relaying the message to the destination node comprises relaying a trigger frame for an uplink transmission to the destination node.
But, INOHIZA (US 20260006594) in as similar or same field of endeavor teaches wherein, when the destination node is out of range of a coverage area of the source node, relaying the message to the destination node comprises relaying a trigger frame for an uplink transmission to the destination node (par. 4, 73, receives a data frame transmitted from another STA and relays and transmits the data frame to an AP has been studied in order to realize further improvement of throughput and expansion of a communication range. In addition, to control relay transmission, use of a Trigger frame complying with the IEEE802.11 series standard has been studied).
Thus, it would have been obvious to the person of ordinary skill in the art before the effectively filing date of the claimed invention to implement the system or method as taught by INOHIZA in the system of SEOK and LEE to relay the message.
The motivation would have been to realize further improvement of throughput and expansion of a communication range.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to THINH D TRAN whose telephone number is (571)270-3934. The examiner can normally be reached mon-fri 9-6.
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 5712727969. 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.
/THINH D TRAN/for /Thinh Tran/, Patent Examiner of Art Unit 2466 05/30/2026
Prosecution Insights