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 § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claim 26 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Claim 26 recites the limitation "the third AP" in --line 3--. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
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) 21-23, 25, 27, 29-31, 33, 36-38, and 40 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1)(a)(2) as being anticipated by Cherian et al. (US 2019/0036583) (“Cherian”).
For claims 21, 29, and 36; Cherian discloses: transmitting, by a first access point (AP), a coordinated transmission (TX) request to at least one second AP, wherein the coordinated TX request comprises first information, and the first information is used to indicate whether the first AP will participate in a multi-AP coordinated transmission in a coordinated beamforming (Co-BF) mode and/or a station (STA) set associated with the first AP in the multi-AP coordinated transmission in the Co-BF mode (paragraph 86, 88, 91, 95-96: the AP 404A may be the leader AP as it has obtained and controls the TXOP at block 1002. At block 1004, AP 404a may send a CoBF invite message to AP 404a and AP 404b…The CoBF invite message may indicate the non-reuse STAs of AP 404a, allowing AP 404b and AP 404c to know whether they can participate in CoBF during the TXOP); wherein each STA set comprises STAs that participate in the multi-AP coordinated transmission in the Co-BF mode among STAs associated with a corresponding AP (paragraph 96: The CoBF invite message may indicate the non-reuse STAs of AP 404a, allowing AP 404b and AP 404c to know whether they can participate in CoBF during the TXOP); receiving, by the first AP, first response information from the second AP, wherein the first response information is used to indicate whether the second AP participates in the multi-AP coordinated transmission in the Co-BF mode and a STA list indicating at least one STA associated with the second AP that participates in the multi-AP coordinated transmission in the Co-BF mode (paragraph 91, 96: AP 404B and AP 404C then decide whether to accept the invitation for CoBF, and determine their respective reuse and non-reuse STAs… AP 404B and AP 404C may then send CoBF accept messages to AP 404a, indicating their respective non-reuse STAs to AP 404a); transmitting, by the first AP, a coordinated TX trigger frame to the second AP to trigger the second AP to perform Co-BF transmission and transmit data to at least one STA indicated in the associated STA list (paragraph 98: AP 404c may transmit a CoBF trigger frame to AP 404b and AP 404c to trigger a DL multi-user (MU) CoBF transmission. The CoBF trigger frame may include an indication of the PPDU duration for the MU CoBF transmission and the identification of the non-reuse STAs); and transmitting, by the first AP together with the data transmission of the second AP, data to at least one STA in the STA set associated with the first AP (paragraph 98: MU CoBF transmissions are sent from AP 404a, AP 404b, and AP 404c during the TXOP… AP 404a may send data to AP 404a's STAs while also sending null to the non-reuse STAs of AP 404b and AP 404c, based the sounding information, to reduce interference to the non-reuse STAs of AP 404b and AP 404c… Similarly, AP 404b may send data to AP 404b's STAs while also sending null to the non-reuse STAs of AP 404a and AP 404c to reduce interference to the non-reuse STAs of AP 404a and AP 404c...Similarly, AP 404c may send data to AP 404c's STAs while also sending null to the non-reuse STAs of AP 404a and AP 404b to reduce interference to the non-reuse STAs of AP 404a and AP 404b).
For claims 22, 30, and 37; Cherian discloses: wherein the first information comprises: at least one associated STA list, wherein each associated STA list corresponds to an AP participating in the multi-AP coordinated transmission in the Co-BF mode, and each associated STA list is used to indicate a list of STAs associated with a corresponding AP (paragraph 96: AP 404a may send a CoBF invite message to AP 404a and AP 404b, which may be a trigger variant broadcast frame. The CoBF invite message may indicate the non-reuse STAs of AP 404a, allowing AP 404b and AP 404c to know whether they can participate in CoBF during the TXOP).
For claims 23, 31, and 38; Cherian discloses: wherein the first information comprises at least one STA list participating in Co-BF, each STA list participating in the Co-BF corresponds to an AP participating in the multi-AP coordinated transmission in the Co-BF mode, and the STA list participating in the Co-BF is used to indicate STAs participating in the multi-AP coordinated transmission in the Co-BF mode and associated with a corresponding AP (paragraph 96: AP 404a may send a CoBF invite message to AP 404a and AP 404b, which may be a trigger variant broadcast frame. The CoBF invite message may indicate the non-reuse STAs of AP 404a, allowing AP 404b and AP 404c to know whether they can participate in CoBF during the TXOP).
For claims 25 and 40; Cherian discloses: wherein the method further comprises: transmitting, by the first AP, first request information to at least one third AP, wherein the first request information is used to request the at least one third AP to participate in the multi-AP coordinated transmission in the Co-BF mode, and the at least one third AP belongs to the multi- AP coordinated set (paragraph 95-96: the AP 404A may be the leader AP as it has obtained and controls the TXOP at block 1002. At block 1004, AP 404a may send a CoBF invite message to AP 404a and AP 404b…The CoBF invite message may indicate the non-reuse STAs of AP 404a, allowing AP 404b and AP 404c to know whether they can participate in CoBF during the TXOP).
For claim 27; Cherian discloses: wherein the first response information comprises an STA list participating in Co-BF, and the STA list participating in the Co-BF is a list of STAs associated with the third AP and participating in the multi-AP coordinated transmission in the Co-BF mode (paragraph 91, 96: AP 404B and AP 404C then decide whether to accept the invitation for CoBF, and determine their respective reuse and non-reuse STAs… AP 404B and AP 404C may then send CoBF accept messages to AP 404a, indicating their respective non-reuse STAs to AP 404a).
For claim 33; Cherian discloses: receiving, by the second AP, first request information transmitted by the first AP, wherein the first request information is used to request the second AP to participate in the multi-AP coordinated transmission in the Co-BF mode (paragraph 95-96: AP 404a may send a CoBF invite message to AP 404a and AP 404b, which may be a trigger variant broadcast frame. The CoBF invite message may indicate the non-reuse STAs of AP 404a, allowing AP 404b and AP 404c to know whether they can participate in CoBF during the TXOP).
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) 24, 28, 32, 35, and 39 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Cherian in view of Pettersson et al. (US 2025/0031244) (“Pettersson”).
For claims 24, 32, and 39; Cherian discloses the subject matter in claim 21 as described above in the office action.
Cherian does not expressly disclose, but Pettersson from similar fields of endeavor teaches: wherein the first information further comprises first indication information, and the first indication information is used to indicate the multi-AP coordinated transmission adopting the Co-BF mode (paragraph 85: AP1 may directly select CBF for downlink transmissions, i.e., downlink CBF TXOP sharing, as the cooperation scheme to be utilized. AP1 then starts the setup procedure by sending a MAPC request 811 to AP2 (and possibly other potential shared APs). The MAPC request 811 indicates that AP1 is willing to share the TXOP and includes a specific MAP indication element corresponding to downlink CBF). Thus it would have been obvious to the person of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to implement the signaling as described by Pettersson in the coordinated multi-AP configuration as described by Cherian. The motivation is to improve coordination signaling.
For claims 28 and 35; Cherian discloses the subject matter in claim 21 as described above in the office action.
Cherian does not expressly disclose, but Pettersson from similar fields of endeavor teaches: wherein the first response information further comprises third indication information, and the third indication information is used to indicate a coordinated transmission mode accepted by the second AP (paragraph 82: the MAPC response 802 may include a respective specific MAP response element for at least one of the indicated cooperation schemes of interest). Thus it would have been obvious to the person of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to implement the signaling as described by Pettersson in the coordinated multi-AP configuration as described by Cherian. The motivation is to improve coordination signaling.
Claim(s) 26 and 34 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Cherian in view of Tsodik et al. (US 2024/0292459) (“Tsodik”).
For claim 26; Cherian discloses the subject matter in claim 21 as described above in the office action.
Cherian does not expressly disclose, but Tsodik from similar fields of endeavor teaches: wherein the first response information comprises an associated STA list and a Co-BF bitmap, the associated STA list is a list of STAs associated with the third AP, and the Co-BF bitmap is used to indicate whether each STA in the list of STAs associated with the third AP participates in the multi-AP coordinated transmission in the Co-BF mode (paragraph 20, 29, 39, 97, 101: the one or more parameters included in the respective station information block comprise nulling information, e.g. a nulling bitmap for enabling the shared AP to determine whether nulling of a transmission signal towards the respective station associated with the sharing AP and to be included in the CoBF transmission scheme is required for the coordinated CoBF transmission scheme…station information blocks 510a′-n′ for the stations 125a,b associated with the respective shared AP…a nulling bitmap 517 indicative of whether nulling of the respective station associated with the sharing AP 110 is required and from which shared AP). Thus it would have been obvious to the person of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to implement the signaling as described by Tsodik in the coordinated multi-AP configuration as described by Cherian. The motivation is to improve coordination signaling.
For claim 34; Cherian discloses the subject matter in claim 29 as described above in the office action. Cherian discloses: the first response information comprises an STA list participating in Co-BF, and the STA list participating in the Co-BF is a list of STAs associated with the second AP and participating in the multi-AP coordinated transmission in the Co-BF mode (paragraph 91, 96: AP 404B and AP 404C then decide whether to accept the invitation for CoBF, and determine their respective reuse and non-reuse STAs… AP 404B and AP 404C may then send CoBF accept messages to AP 404a, indicating their respective non-reuse STAs to AP 404a).
Cherian does not expressly disclose, but Tsodik from similar fields of endeavor teaches: wherein the first response information comprises an associated STA list and a Co-BF bitmap, the associated STA list is a list of STAs associated with the second AP, and the Co-BF bitmap is used to indicate whether each STA in the list of STAs associated with the second AP participates in the multi-AP coordinated transmission in the Co-BF mode (paragraph 20, 29, 39, 97, 101: the one or more parameters included in the respective station information block comprise nulling information, e.g. a nulling bitmap for enabling the shared AP to determine whether nulling of a transmission signal towards the respective station associated with the sharing AP and to be included in the CoBF transmission scheme is required for the coordinated CoBF transmission scheme…station information blocks 510a′-n′ for the stations 125a,b associated with the respective shared AP…a nulling bitmap 517 indicative of whether nulling of the respective station associated with the sharing AP 110 is required and from which shared AP). Thus it would have been obvious to the person of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to implement the signaling as described by Tsodik in the coordinated multi-AP configuration as described by Cherian. The motivation is to improve coordination signaling.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Kim et al. (US 2025/0070837); Kim discloses a new RAT system including NR uses an OFDM transmission method or a transmission method similar to it. A new RAT system may follow OFDM parameters different from OFDM parameters of LTE. Alternatively, a new RAT system follows a numerology of the existing LTE/LTE-A as it is, but may support a wider system bandwidth (e.g., 100 MHz). Alternatively, one cell may support a plurality of numerologies. In other words, terminals which operate in accordance with different numerologies may coexist in one cell.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JOHN D BLANTON whose telephone number is (571)270-3933. The examiner can normally be reached 7am-6pm EST, Mon-Thu.
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 571-272-7969. 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.
/JOHN D BLANTON/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2466
Prosecution Insights