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 .
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.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
(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) 1, 4-5, 7-8, 11-12, 14, 17-18 and 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Ho et al (US 2021/0100050 A1).
Regarding claim 1, Ho appears to disclose a method comprising:
determining that a client device has associated over a first link having a first Media Access Control (MAC) address ([0053]-[0054] disclosing the STA performs association operations on channels in one or more frequency bands (e.g., 2.4 GHz, 5 GHz, etc.) to establish a link; Fig. 4, b21, [0068] disclosing the STA uses first link MAC address b21 for link 420 of a first WLAN interface for the 2.4 GHz band; [0070] disclosing during the association process the AP receives the first link MAC address);
receiving, from the client device over the first link, a first management frame that identifies a MAC address of a second link associated with the client device (Fig. 4, b22, [0068] disclosing the STA uses second link MAC address b22 for link 430 of a second WLAN interface for the 5 GHz band; [0070] disclosing during association the AP receives the second link address); and
determining, based on information in the first management frame, that the first link and the second link are associated with the client device ([0070] disclosing during association the AP stores an association between the first link MAC address, the second link MAC address as belonging to the STA).
Regarding claim 4, Ho appears to disclose the method of claim 1, wherein the first management frame is received unsolicited ([0070] disclosing during the association the STA may provide the addresses).
Regarding claim 5, Ho appears to disclose the method of claim 1, further comprising:
determining that the client device has associated over a second link having the second MAC address ([0053]-[0054] disclosing the STA performs association operations on channels in one or more frequency bands (e.g., 2.4 GHz, 5 GHz, etc.) to establish a link; Fig. 4, b22, [0068] disclosing the STA uses second link MAC address b22 for link 430 of a second WLAN interface for the 5 GHz band; [0070] disclosing during the association process the AP receives the second link MAC address); and
receiving, from the client device over the second link, a second management frame that identifies the MAC address of the second link associated with the client device (Fig. 4, b22, [0068] disclosing the STA uses second link MAC address b22 for link 430 of a second WLAN interface for the 5 GHz band; [0070] disclosing during association the AP receives the second link address).
Regarding claim 7, Ho appears to disclose the method of claim 1, further comprising addressing, in response to determining that the first link and the second link are associated with the client device, at least one of
an infrastructure resource issue,
a policy issue, and
a management issue ([0070] disclosing the AP stores a relationship between the first link MAC address and the second link MAC address; [0079] disclosing the AP may receive a downlink frame comprising the network MAC address M and the second link MAC address b22 and can relate the first network MAC address M to the first link MAC address).
Regarding claims 8 and 11-12, the claims are directed towards a system comprising: a memory storage; and a processing unit coupled to the memory storage, wherein the processing unit is operative to perform the method of claims 1 and 4-5. Ho discloses such implementations (Fig. 8, [0089], [0095]); accordingly, claims 8 and 11-12 are rejected on the grounds presented above for claims 1 and 4-5.
Regarding claims 14, 17-18 and 20, the claims are directed towards a non-transitory computer-readable medium that stores a set of instructions which when executed perform the method of claims 1, 4-5 and 7. Ho discloses such implementations (Fig. 8, [0089], [0095]); accordingly, claims 14, 17-18 and 20 are rejected on the grounds presented above for claims 1, 4-5 and 7.
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) 2-3, 6, 9-10, 13, 15-16 and 19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ho et al (US 2021/0100050 A1) in view of Ho et al., “(Re)Assoc Protection for 11bi”, IEEE 802.11-22/0463r0, hereafter Ho2.
Regarding claim 2, Ho does not disclose the following; however, Ho2 suggests the method of claim 1, wherein the first management frame is received over a first secured tunnel (Slide 6, Encrypted association messaging).
Ho discloses the addresses are hidden from and not discoverable by the other WLAN devices but does not provide teaching on how to achieve this; thus, one of ordinary skill in the art would look to Ho2 for a manner in which to hide this information. Ho2 teaches that elements included in association requests and responses are sent in the clear which may expose the information and encrypting the association messages can hide the information (Slides 2-3). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify Ho to use the techniques of Ho2 to hide the addresses because it enables a normal data connectivity and cleaner separation of “actual” authentication and association (Slide 5) while solving the problem left to the reader of Ho on how to hide the addresses.
Regarding claim 3, Ho appears to disclose the method of claim 2, wherein the first management frame is received in response to a dialog between an Access Point and the client device over the first secured tunnel ([0053]).
Regarding claim 6, Ho does not disclose the following; however, Ho2 suggests the method of claim 5, wherein the second management frame is received over a second secured tunnel (Slide 6, Encrypted association messaging).
Ho discloses the addresses are hidden from and not discoverable by the other WLAN devices but does not provide teaching on how to achieve this; thus, one of ordinary skill in the art would look to Ho2 for a manner in which to hide this information. Ho2 teaches that elements included in association requests and responses are sent in the clear which may expose the information and encrypting the association messages can hide the information (Slides 2-3). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify Ho to use the techniques of Ho2 to hide the addresses because it enables a normal data connectivity and cleaner separation of “actual” authentication and association (Slide 5) while solving the problem left to the reader of Ho on how to hide the addresses.
Regarding claims 9-10 and 13, the claims are directed towards the system which performs the method of claims 2-3 and 6; accordingly, claims 9-10 and 13 are rejected on the grounds presented above for claims 2-3 and 6.
Regarding claims 15-16 and 19, the claims are directed towards the non-transitory computer-readable medium comprising instructions to perform the method of claims 2-3 and 6; accordingly, claims 15-16 and 19 are rejected on the grounds presented above for claims 2-3 and 6.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Joseph A Bednash whose telephone number is (571)270-7500. The examiner can normally be reached 7 AM - 4:30 PM M-F.
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, Huy Vu can be reached at (571)272-3155. 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.
/JOSEPH A BEDNASH/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2461
Prosecution Insights