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 .
Priority
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 08/28/2024, 02/15/2025 and 03/11/2025 is considered. The submission is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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.
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)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 1-7, 11-14, 16 and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Minotani et al. (US 2023/0327717 A1; hereinafter Minotani).
Regarding claim 1, Minotani shows an electronic device (Figure 25; Par. 0281, 0283; STA performing the disclosed method.), comprising:
a processor (Par. 0281; STA includes a processor.);
a wireless communication circuit operatively connected to the processor, the wireless communication circuit configured to transmit and receive a wireless signal (Par. 0283; STA includes a transceiver, coupled to the processor, for transmitting and receiving a wireless signal.); and
a memory configured to store instructions (Par. 0015; STA includes a storage medium for storing a computer program to perform the disclosed method.), wherein the instructions are executed individually or collectively by the processor to cause the electronic device to:
receive a null data packet announcement (NDPA) frame notifying channel sounding (Figure 25; Par. 0058, 0217-0218; receiving an NDPA frame used for channel sounding.);
receive a null data packet (NDP) frame (Figure 25; Par. 0217-0218; receiving an NDP frame.);
obtain channel state information based on the NDP frame (Figure 25; Par. 0219; performing channel estimation based on the received NDP frame.);
receive a beamforming report poll (BFRP) frame (Figure 25; Par. 0220; receiving a BFRP frame.);
transmit a feedback frame comprising the obtained channel state information based on the BFRP frame (Figure 25; Par. 0222; transmitting feedback information to the AP based on the BFRP frame.); and
perform communication through a combination of one or more access points (APs) determined based on the feedback frame in a network environment for multi-AP coordination (Figures 1, 25 and 29; Par. 0063; performing DL communication with the AP based on the feedback information in the network embodied with multi-AP coordination.).
Regarding claim 2, Minotani shows wherein the instructions are executed individually or collectively by the processor to further cause the electronic device to report state information of the electronic device to a device for controlling multi-AP coordination (Figure 25; Par. 0222; transmitting feedback information to the AP based on the BFRP frame.).
Regarding claim 3, Minotani shows wherein the state information comprises a combination of one or more of:
mobility information of the electronic device; or
information indicating a wireless network environment of the electronic device (Figure 25; Par. 0069, 0219, 246; performing channel estimation corresponding to respective links of the network based on the received NDP frame.).
Regarding claim 4, Minotani shows wherein to report the state information, the instructions are executed by the processor to report the state information according to an autonomous report or to request reporting of the state information from the device for controlling multi-AP coordination (Par. 0101-0102, 0199; multi-link scheduler 104 may determine whether to request the multi-link feedback transmission from STA 200.).
Regarding claim 5, Minotani shows wherein to report the state information and to request reporting of the state information, a radio measurement action frame is used (Par. 0101-0102, 0199; AP 100 may, for example, include the control information on the feedback information distribution as illustrated in FIG. 21 in user information of a feedback-request signal and indicate the information to STA 200. An example of the feedback-request signals includes, for example, an NDPA or a Trigger frame.).
Regarding claim 6, Minotani shows wherein the combination of one or more APs is determined based on signal-to-noise ratio (SNR) information of one or more APs capable of participating in multi-AP coordination obtained from the feedback frame (Par. 0065; The feedback information is classified into, for example, “HE compressed Beamforming Report,” “HE MU Exclusive Beamforming Report,” and “HE Channel Quality Information (CQI) Report.” The HE Compressed Beamforming Report may include, for example, reception quality for each spatial stream (e.g., mean Signal-to-Noise Ratio (SNR)), and a feedback matrix whose informational amount is compressed in a prescribed manner. The HE MU Exclusive Beamforming Report may include, for example, a value of the difference obtained by subtracting the mean reception quality of each spatial stream (e.g., mean SNR) from reception quality for each subcarrier (e.g., SNR). Further, the HE CQI Report may include, for example, the mean reception quality (e.g., mean SNR) of the spatial streams in 26-tone Resource Unit (RU) units.).
Regarding claim 7, Minotani shows wherein a protocol of the channel sounding is triggered according to the report of the state information (Par. 0249; The AP receives the UL MU-MIMO signal transmitted from each of STA 1 and STA 2 and acquires the feedback information (S309). The AP may perform, based on the feedback information, scheduling for performing DL MU-MIMO transmission and generate a steering matrix on for each link, for example. The AP may also perform null-control on the steering matrix in order to reduce interference between the STAs, for example.).
Regarding claim 11, Minotani shows a communication device (Figure 25; Par. 0287-0288; AP performing the disclosed method.) for controlling multi-access point (AP) coordination, the communication device comprising:
a processor (Par. 0281; AP includes a processor.);
a wireless communication circuit operatively connected to the processor, the wireless communication circuit configured to transmit and receive a wireless signal (Par. 0283; AP includes a transceiver, coupled to the processor, for transmitting and receiving a wireless signal.); and
a memory configured to store instructions (Par. 0015, 0287; AP includes a storage medium for storing a computer program to perform the disclosed method.), wherein the instructions are executed individually or collectively by the processor to cause the communication device to:
collect feedback frames according to channel sounding between APs and an electronic device (Figure 25; Par. 0058, 0222; receiving feedback information from STAs according to channel sounding performed between APs and STAs.), wherein the APs are capable of participating in multi-AP coordination (Par. 0259; AP 100 may coordinate with a plurality of APs (e.g., referred to as “multi-AP”) and indicate, to STA 200, multi-link transmission of feedback information for the respective APs.); and
determine a combination of one or more APs to communicate with the electronic device based on the feedback frames (Par. 0063; The AP performs reception processing on the feedback information transmitted from the STA and determines, based on the received feedback information, resource allocation information and a transmission parameter for the destination STA or each STA. Moreover, the AP may derive, based on the feedback information, a steering matrix so as to perform DL transmission (e.g., MU-MIMO) for the STA.).
Regarding claim 12, Minotani shows wherein the instructions are executed individually or collectively by the processor to further cause the communication device to request reporting of state information of the electronic device (Figure 25; Par. 0222; transmitting feedback information to the AP based on the BFRP frame.).
Regarding claim 13, Minotani shows wherein the state information comprises a combination of one or more of:
mobility information of the electronic device; or
information indicating a wireless network environment of the electronic device (Figure 25; Par. 0069, 0219, 246; performing channel estimation corresponding to respective links of the network based on the received NDP frame.).
Regarding claim 14, Minotani shows wherein to report the state information and to request reporting of the state information, a radio measurement action frame is used (Par. 0101-0102, 0199; AP 100 may, for example, include the control information on the feedback information distribution as illustrated in FIG. 21 in user information of a feedback-request signal and indicate the information to STA 200. An example of the feedback-request signals includes, for example, an NDPA or a Trigger frame.).
Regarding claim 16, Minotani shows wherein the instructions are executed individually or collectively by the processor to further cause the communication device to: obtain signal-to-noise ratio (SNR) information of the APs capable of participating in multi-AP coordination from the feedback frames; and determine the combination of one or more APs to communicate with the electronic device based on the SNR information (Par. 0065; The feedback information is classified into, for example, “HE compressed Beamforming Report,” “HE MU Exclusive Beamforming Report,” and “HE Channel Quality Information (CQI) Report.” The HE Compressed Beamforming Report may include, for example, reception quality for each spatial stream (e.g., mean Signal-to-Noise Ratio (SNR)), and a feedback matrix whose informational amount is compressed in a prescribed manner. The HE MU Exclusive Beamforming Report may include, for example, a value of the difference obtained by subtracting the mean reception quality of each spatial stream (e.g., mean SNR) from reception quality for each subcarrier (e.g., SNR). Further, the HE CQI Report may include, for example, the mean reception quality (e.g., mean SNR) of the spatial streams in 26-tone Resource Unit (RU) units.).
Regarding claim 20, Minotani shows an operating method of an electronic device (Figure 25; Par. 0281, 0283; STA performing the disclosed method.), the operating method comprising:
receiving a null data packet announcement (NDPA) frame notifying channel sounding (Figure 25; Par. 0058, 0217-0218; receiving an NDPA frame used for channel sounding.);
receiving a null data packet (NDP) frame (Figure 25; Par. 0217-0218; receiving an NDP frame.);
obtaining channel state information based on the NDP frame (Figure 25; Par. 0219; performing channel estimation based on the received NDP frame.);
receiving a beamforming report poll (BFRP) frame (Figure 25; Par. 0220; receiving a BFRP frame.);
transmitting a feedback frame comprising the obtained channel state information based on the BFRP frame (Figure 25; Par. 0222; transmitting feedback information to the AP based on the BFRP frame.); and
performing communication through a combination of one or more access points (APs) determined based on the feedback frame in a network environment for multi-AP coordination (Figures 1, 25 and 29; Par. 0063; performing DL communication with the AP based on the feedback information in the network embodied with multi-AP coordination.).
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.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claim(s) 8-10 and 17-19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Minotani in view of Kwon et al. (US 2021/0266931 A1; hereinafter Kwon).
Regarding claim 8, Minotani shows all of the elements except wherein the instructions are executed individually or collectively by the processor to further cause the electronic device to perform communication by switching from a single AP to a multi-AP combination.
However, the above-mentioned claim limitations are well-established in the art as evidenced by Kwon. Specifically, Kwon shows wherein the instructions are executed individually or collectively by the processor to further cause the electronic device to perform communication by switching from a single AP to a multi-AP combination (Par. 0055-0058; Multi-link (ML) reassociation (i.e. resetup or transition) service is invoked: to move a current multi-link setup of a non-AP-MLD (e.g. 104-1) from a first AP-MLD (e.g. 102) to a second AP-MLD (not shown); and/or to switch a current association of a non-AP-STA (e.g. 120-1) with a single-link AP (not shown) to a multi-link setup with a multi-link AP-MLD (e.g. 102); and/or to switch a current multi-link setup of a non-AP-MLD (e.g. 104-1) with an AP-MLD (e.g. 102) to an association with another single-link or multi-link AP (not shown).).
In view of the above, having the system of Minotani, then given the well-established teaching of Kwon, it would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the system of Minotani as taught by Kwon, in order to provide motivation to improve transmission efficiency in Multi-Link (Par. 0016 of Minotani).
Regarding claim 9, Minotani shows all of the elements except wherein the instructions are executed individually or collectively by the processor to further cause the electronic device to perform communication by switching from a first multi-AP combination to a second multi-AP combination.
However, the above-mentioned claim limitations are well-established in the art as evidenced by Kwon. Specifically, Kwon shows wherein the instructions are executed individually or collectively by the processor to further cause the electronic device to perform communication by switching from a first multi-AP combination to a second multi-AP combination (Par. 0055-0058; Multi-link (ML) reassociation (i.e. resetup or transition) service is invoked: to move a current multi-link setup of a non-AP-MLD (e.g. 104-1) from a first AP-MLD (e.g. 102) to a second AP-MLD (not shown); and/or to switch a current association of a non-AP-STA (e.g. 120-1) with a single-link AP (not shown) to a multi-link setup with a multi-link AP-MLD (e.g. 102); and/or to switch a current multi-link setup of a non-AP-MLD (e.g. 104-1) with an AP-MLD (e.g. 102) to an association with another single-link or multi-link AP (not shown).).
In view of the above, having the system of Minotani, then given the well-established teaching of Kwon, it would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the system of Minotani as taught by Kwon, in order to provide motivation to improve transmission efficiency in Multi-Link (Par. 0016 of Minotani).
Regarding claim 10, Minotani shows all of the elements except wherein the instructions are executed individually or collectively by the processor to further cause the electronic device to perform communication by switching from a multi-AP combination to a single AP.
However, the above-mentioned claim limitations are well-established in the art as evidenced by Kwon. Specifically, Kwon shows wherein the instructions are executed individually or collectively by the processor to further cause the electronic device to perform communication by switching from a multi-AP combination to a single AP (Par. 0055-0058; Multi-link (ML) reassociation (i.e. resetup or transition) service is invoked: to move a current multi-link setup of a non-AP-MLD (e.g. 104-1) from a first AP-MLD (e.g. 102) to a second AP-MLD (not shown); and/or to switch a current association of a non-AP-STA (e.g. 120-1) with a single-link AP (not shown) to a multi-link setup with a multi-link AP-MLD (e.g. 102); and/or to switch a current multi-link setup of a non-AP-MLD (e.g. 104-1) with an AP-MLD (e.g. 102) to an association with another single-link or multi-link AP (not shown).).
In view of the above, having the system of Minotani, then given the well-established teaching of Kwon, it would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the system of Minotani as taught by Kwon, in order to provide motivation to improve transmission efficiency in Multi-Link (Par. 0016 of Minotani).
Regarding claims 17, 18 and 19, these claims are rejected based on the same reasoning as presented in the rejection of claims 8, 9 and 10, respectively.
Claim(s) 15 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Minotani in view of Luo et al. (US 2025/0052882 A1; hereinafter Luo).
Regarding claim 15, Minotani shows all of the elements including the radio measurement action frame, as discussed above. Minotani does not specifically show wherein a radio measurement action field value of the radio measurement action frame is set to a value between 6 and 255.
However, the above-mentioned claim limitations are well-established in the art as evidenced by Luo. Specifically, Luo shows wherein a radio measurement action field value of the radio measurement action frame is set to a value between 6 and 255 (Par. 0101-0103; the sensing-by-proxy request frame carries information by a field which may include any value in the range of 51 to 255.).
In view of the above, having the system of Minotani, then given the well-established teaching of Luo, it would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the system of Minotani as taught by Luo, in order to provide motivation to improve a quality and/or progress of other services being performed (Par. 0141 of Luo).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
US 20260172191 A1 - DATA DRIVEN SOUNDING FEEDBACK REPORTS FOR WLAN SYSTEMS
US 20250351179 A1 - WIRELESS COMMUNICATION METHOD AND DEVICE
US 20240413883 A1 - DEVICE OF WIRELESS COMMUNICATION
US 20240356711 A1 - PROTOCOL AND FRAME FORMAT FOR COORDINATED BEAMFORMING
US 20240275445 A1 - ENHANCED CHANNEL SOUNDING PROTOCOLS FOR WLAN SYSTEMS
US 20240243862 A1 - MULTI-AP CHANNEL SOUNDING PROCEDURES FOR WLAN SYSTEMS
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to REDENTOR M PASIA whose telephone number is (571)272-9745. The examiner can normally be reached Mondays-Thursdays - 5am-245pm and Fridays 5am-330pm.
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, Un Cho can be reached at (571)272-7919. 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.
/REDENTOR PASIA/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2413
Prosecution Insights