DETAILED ACTION
Pre-AIA or AIA Status
1. The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
2. Claims 1-12 are presented for examination.
3. This Office Action is in response to application 18/819133 (US 20250112966 A1) was filed August 29, 2024.
Papers Submitted
4. It is hereby acknowledged that the following paper have been received and placed of record in the file:
a. Information Disclosure Statement as received on March 17, 2025 and August 29, 2024 were considered.
Drawings Objection
5. The drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a). The drawings must show every feature of the invention specified in the claims. Therefore, the “wireless apparatus” with “wireless control circuitry” and “standby control circuitry” in claim 1. No new matter should be entered.
Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
Claim Rejections – 35 U.S.C. 112(b)
6. 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.
7. Claim(s) 3-5 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite because the claims are unclear regarding a condition where the circuitry does not cause to stop (i.e., one negative cancels of another negative) standing by and there is no support for this condition in the specification. An indefinite structure fails 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. Applicant is recommended to remove the functional language and insert the actual structure.
Claim Rejections – 35 U.S.C. § 102
8. 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.
9. Claim(s) 1, 2, 4, 5, 7 and 9-12 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Klemets et al. (US 20190199791 A1) hereinafter Klemets.
10. Regarding claim(s) 1, Klemets teach a wireless apparatus ([0031] “receiving device”) wirelessly communicable with an information processing apparatus ([0031] “Wi-Fi Direct”, [0029] “transmitting device”), the wireless apparatus comprising:
wireless control circuitry ([0031] “peer receiver functionality”) configured to stand by for ([0031] “a beacon packet to be transmitted”. Examiner Note: As per MPEP 2111, in light of Spec page 6 lines 1-2 ‘standing by for a connection’ may also mean… transmitting a beacon.) both a peer-to-peer (P2P) connection ([0031] “peer communications channel (e.g., Miracast of Wi-Fi Direct)”) and an infrastructure connection ([0029] “infrastructure Wi-Fi”, [0037] “infrastructure communications channel”) from the information processing apparatus ([0031] “transmitting device” [0031]); and
standby control circuitry ([0029] “Wi-Fi Direct”) configured to cause the wireless control circuitry to stop standing ([0029] “disabled”, “Wi-Fi Direct functionality is disabled (such as by suspending the transmission of beacon packets”, “when a Miracast transmitter has not been detected”. Examiner Note: As per MPEP 2111, in light of Spec page 6 lines 9-10 ‘stopping standing by for a connection’ means stopping transmitting a beacon. Also, in light of Spec page 1 lines 17 “wireless communication technique is Miracast”.) by for the P2P connection ([0031] “peer communication channel is not being used”) when the wireless control circuitry is performing the infrastructure connection ([0031] “the infrastructure communication channel”) with the information processing apparatus ([0031] “from the transmitting device”).
11. Regarding claim(s) 2, Klemets teach wherein when the wireless control circuitry is performing the infrastructure connection ([0072] “over an infrastructure communication channel”) with the information processing apparatus, the standby control circuitry causes the wireless control circuitry to stop standing by ([0073] “suspending the transmission of beacon frames”. Examiner Note: As per MPEP 2111, in light of Spec page 6 lines 9-10 ‘stopping standing by for a connection’ means stopping transmitting a beacon.) for the P2P connection ([0073] “advertising the peer communication channel”).
12. Regarding claim(s) 4, Klemets teach wherein when the wireless control circuitry is performing ([0039] “can be a dedicated”) the P2P connection ([0039] “first channel 250”, “for peer-to-peer communications”) with the information processing apparatus, the standby control circuitry does not cause the wireless control circuitry to stop standing by ([0031] “a beacon packet to be transmitted”. Examiner Note: As per MPEP 2111, in light of Spec page 6 lines 1-2 ‘standing by for a connection’ may also mean… transmitting a beacon.) for the infrastructure connection ([0039] “infrastructure communication channel”).
13. Regarding claim(s) 5, Klemets teach wherein when the wireless control circuitry is performing the P2P connection ([0037] “form a peer-to-peer connections”) with the information processing apparatus ([0037] “transmitting device 120 can discover”), the standby control circuitry does not cause the wireless control circuitry ([0031] “peer receiver functionality”) to stop standing by ([0031] “a beacon packet to be transmitted”. Examiner Note: As per MPEP 2111, in light of spec page 6 lines 1-2 ‘standing by for a connection’ may also mean… transmitting a beacon.) for another P2P connection ([0037] “can form a peer-to-peer connections”).
14. Regarding claim(s) 7, Klemets teach further comprising
a storage area that stores correspondence information including identification information ([0037] “directory service 135”) of an access point ([0037] “access point 130”) for which the standby control circuitry performs control for stopping standing by ([0073] “disabled”, “suspending the transmission of beacon frames”. Examiner Note: As per MPEP, in light of spec page 6 lines 9-10 ‘stopping standing by for a connection’ means stopping transmitting a beacon.) for the P2P connection ([0037] “peer-to-peer connection”, [0073] “peer communication channel”, [0081] “inactive”, “Wi-Fi Direct”) during the infrastructure connection ([0037] “infrastructure communications channel”, [0081] “the active second communication channel can use the infrastructure Wi-Fi”),
wherein when the correspondence information includes the identification information ([0037] “directory service 135”) of the access point ([0037] “access point 130”) being connected to the wireless control circuitry and the wireless control circuitry is performing the infrastructure connection with the information processing apparatus, the standby control circuitry causes the wireless control circuitry to stop standing by ([0073] “disabled”, “suspending the transmission of beacon frames”. Examiner Note: As per MPEP 2111, in light of Spec page 6 lines 9-10 ‘stopping standing by for a connection’ means stopping transmitting a beacon.) for the P2P connection ([0037] “peer-to-peer connection”, [0081] “one of the communication channels is an infrastructure channel and one of the channels is a peer channel”).
15. Regarding claim(s) 9, Klemets teach wherein the wireless control circuitry communicates with the information processing apparatus in accordance with a Miracast™ communication standard ([0026] “additional standards such as Miracast, can be layered on top of Wi-Fi Direct”, [0031] “Miracast and other peer-to-peer communications can be initiated between a transmitting device and a receiving device over an inactive peer communication channel (e.g., Miracast over Wi-Fi Direct)”).
16. Regarding claim(s) 10, Klemets teach a communication system comprising:
the wireless apparatus according to claim 1; and
the information processing apparatus ([0031] “transmitting device”, [0039] “wireless access point”) including circuitry configured to perform an infrastructure connection ([0039] “an infrastructure communication channel”) with the wireless apparatus ([0031] “receiving device”, [0037] “directory service 135”, [0039] “wireless access point”).
17. Regarding claim(s) 11 and 12, Klemets teach a communication control method performed by a wireless apparatus wirelessly communicable with an information processing apparatus, the communication control method comprising:
standing by ([0031] “a beacon packet to be transmitted”. Examiner Note: As per MPEP 2111, in light of Spec page 6 lines 1-2 ‘standing by for a connection’ may also mean… transmitting a beacon.) for both a peer-to-peer (P2P) connection ([0031] “peer communications channel (e.g., Miracast of Wi-Fi Direct)”) and an infrastructure connection ([0029] “infrastructure Wi-Fi”, [0037] “infrastructure communications channel”) from the information processing apparatus ([0031] “transmitting device”); and
stopping standing by ([0029] “disabled”, “Wi-Fi Direct functionality is disabled (such as by suspending the transmission of beacon packets”. Examiner Note: As per MPEP 2111, in light of Spec page 6 lines 9-10 ‘stopping standing by for a connection’ means stopping transmitting a beacon.) for the P2P connection ([0031] “peer communication channel is not being used”) when performing the infrastructure connection ([0031] “the infrastructure communication channel”) with the information processing apparatus ([0031] “from the transmitting device”).
Claim Rejections – 35 U.S.C. § 103
18. 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.
19. 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.
20. Claim(s) 3 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Klemets as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Alam et al. (US 20220418017 A1) hereinafter Alam.
21. Regarding claim 3, Klemets do not explicitly teach when the wireless control circuitry is performing the another infrastructure connection with the information processing apparatus, the standby control circuitry does not cause the wireless control circuitry to stop standing by for another infrastructure connection, but in a similar field of endeavor Alam teach:
wherein when ([0029] “WNIC 114 enables”, “to communicate”, [0030] “upon determining that”) the wireless control circuitry is performing ([0030] “the WNIC 114 supports multiple connections”) the infrastructure connection ([0030] “one infrastructure connection”) with the information processing apparatus, the standby control circuitry does not cause the wireless control circuitry to stop standing by ([0031] “a beacon packet to be transmitted”. Examiner Note: As per MPEP 2111, in light of spec page 6 lines 1-2 ‘standing by for a connection’ may also mean… transmitting a beacon.) for another infrastructure connection ([0030] ”another infrastructure connection”).
22. Thus, it would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person of ordinary skill in the art to readily recognize the advantage of modifying Klemets’s system which causes a beacon packet to be transmitted to discover devices can be modified to be continued via a motivation to combine with prior art (Alam) that teaches upon determining WNIC supports multiple infrastructure connections, each of these interfaces may remain operational so long as the WNIC remains on, which is well known in the art ([0030]).
23. Claim(s) 6 and 8 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Klemets, as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Kim (KR 100678699 B1, translated to English by Document Viewer).
24. Regarding claim(s) 6, Klemets teach further comprising:
a display to display a screen that accepts switching between enabling and disabling a control for stopping standing by (Examiner Note: As per MPEP 2111, in light of Spec page 6 lines 9-10 ‘stopping standing by for a connection’ means stopping transmitting a beacon.) for the P2P connection during the infrastructure connection ([0031] “peer-to-peer communications can be initiated”),
wherein, when the control is enabled ([0041] “trigger to a transition to a higher power state”) on the screen, the standby control circuitry causes the wireless control circuitry to ([0041] “trigger a transition to a higher power state”) stop standing by ([0029] “suspending beacon packets”. Examiner Note: As per MPEP 2111, in light of Spec page 6 lines 9-10 ‘stopping standing by for a connection’ means stopping transmitting a beacon.) for the P2P connection in a case ([0029] “bandwidth that may be better used for infrastructure Wi-Fi communications“) where the wireless control circuitry is performing the infrastructure connection with the information processing apparatus.
Klemets do not explicitly teach a display to display a screen that accepts switching between enabling and disabling a control, but in a similar field of endeavor Kim teach:
a display (page 5 lines 15-16 “GUI”) to display a screen (page 5 lines 15-16 “screen”, page 5 lines 29-31 “status for each pilot beacon channel is displayed”, “beacon in use”, “is displayed”) that accepts switching (page 5 lines 15-16 “add/change screen”) between enabling and disabling a control (page 5 lines 17-19 “a field to enable/disable”) (page 5 lines 15-20, In the base station add/change screen of the GUI including the remote control function of the beacon, where a field is added to enable/disable each pilot beacon.).
25. Thus, it would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person of ordinary skill in the art to readily recognize the advantage of modifying Klemets’s system by when activating the peer communication can be improved by controlling when initiating/disabling the connection ([0029] 0031]) via a motivation to combine with prior art (Kim) that teaches a base station can add/change screen of the GUI, which could be integrated in a display, including the remote control function of the beacon where the base station table adds a field to enable/disable, which is well known in the art, each pilot beacon (Abstract, page 5 lines 17-20).
26. Regarding claim(s) 8, Klemets do not explicitly teach a display when the standby control circuitry causes the wireless control circuitry to stop standing by for the P2P connection during the infrastructure connection with the information processing apparatus, the display displays that the wireless apparatus has stopped standing by for the P2P connection, but in a similar field of endeavor Kim teach further comprising:
a display (page 5 line 25-26 “status display screen of the GUI”),
wherein when (page 11 lines 34-35 “beacon equipment is to disable the pilot beacon.” Hence, inherently beacon equipment decides when to disable a beacon.) the standby control circuitry causes the wireless control circuitry to stop standing by (page 5 lines 18-19 “a field to enable/disable each pilot beacon channel”, page 11 lines 34-35 “beacon equipment is to disable the pilot beacon.” Hence, inherently a pilot beacon can be disabled. Examiner Note: As per MPEP 2111, in light of Spec page 6 lines 9-10 ‘stopping standing by for a connection’ means stopping transmitting a beacon.) for the P2P connection during the infrastructure connection with the information processing apparatus,
the display displays (page 5 lines 25-26 “status display screen of the GUI”) that the wireless apparatus has stopped standing by (page 5 lines 18-19 “a field to enable/disable”, page 5 lines 29-30 “pilot beacon status for each pilot beacon channel is displayed”, Note: As per MPEP 2111, in light of spec page 6 lines 9-10 ‘stopping standing by for a connection’ means stopping transmitting a beacon.) for the P2P connection.
CONCLUSION
27. The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Ondrej C. Vostal whose telephone number is (571). The examiner can normally be reached on Monday - Friday from 8:00 am to 5:00 pm.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Glenton Burgess, can be reached at telephone number 571-272-3949. 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 Patent Center. Status information for published applications may be obtained from Patent Center. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Patent Center to authorized users only. Should you have questions about access to the USPTO patent electronic filing system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free).
Examiner interviews are available via a variety of formats. See MPEP § 713.01. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) Form at https://www.uspto.gov/InterviewPractice.
/ONDREJ C VOSTAL/ Patent Examiner
Art Unit 2454
February 20, 2026
/DOUGLAS B BLAIR/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2454