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 .
Response to Arguments
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
Applicant's arguments filed 09/14/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. Applicants allege that the disclosure of Lim et al. (US 2023/0188395 A1), does not disclose:
“a mode of the PPDU is one of three modes, and wherein the three modes include, a directional multi-gigabit (DMG) single carrier (SC) mode, an enhanced directional multi-gigabit (EDMG) SC mode, and an EDMG orthogonal frequency division multiplexing (OFDM) mode”
Applicants arguments essentially boil down to the disclosure does not teach and/or recite mode, which is incorrect. For a first matter the word mode is defined as a particular type or form of something, see https://www.dictionary.com/browse/mode. Thus, the very recitation of each of the different types of PPDU teaches the mode different modes that the PPDU can take. Further the specification of Lim teaches the EDMG-SC mode as taught in par.[0052] and describes other PPDU modes throughout the specification as well as the ones claimed. Thus, the applicant remarks are unpersuasive and the rejection is sustained.
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) 1-5, 8-12, and 15-19, is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Lim et al. (US 2023/0188395 A1).
Regarding claims 1 and 15, Lim discloses:
an information indication apparatus (fig.1 depicts a plurality of stations (STA) in a wireless communications network), comprising:
at least one processor (par.[0142] which describes a processor configured to execute instructions from a computer readable medium (CRM));
one or more memories coupled to the at least one processor and storing programming instructions for execution by the at least one processor to (par.[0142] which describes the computer readable medium):
performing an information indication method, comprising:
generating, a physical layer protocol data unit (PPDU) (par.[0009] which teaches that the transmitting station generates a frame. The frame being a PPDU) , wherein the PPDU comprises sensing indication information (Abstract: describes an indication in the PPDU, par.[0011] recites, in part, “The frame includes an EDMG-Header-A field. A packet classification indicator is included in a reserved bit of the EDMG-Header-A field.), and the sensing indication information indicates that the PPDU is a PPDU used for sensing measurement (par.[0011] which recites, in part, “The packet classification indicator includes information indicating that the frame is a sensing frame used for sensing.”);
wherein a mode of the PPDU is one of three modes (par.[0052] describes the modes of the PPDU, see for example, EDMG SC mode PPDU. Thus, the); and
wherein the three modes include the PPDU is a direction multi-gigabit (DMG) single carrier (SC) (par.[0032] describes 802.11ad which utilizes DMG-SC, this is a mode as discussed above) mode PPDU, an enhanced direction multi-gigabit (EDMG) SC mode PPDU (par.[0090] describes a EDMG-SC, also see par.[0052] for EDMG-SC mode PPDU), or an EDMG orthogonal frequency division multiplexing (OFDM) mode PPDU (par.[0090] describes an EDMG-OFDM); and
a transceiver, configured to send the PPDU (par.[0037] describes a sensing transmitting device configured to transmit a sensing PPDU).
Regarding claims 2, 9, and 16, Lim discloses:
wherein the PPDU is the EDMG SC mode PPDU (par.[0090] describes the EDMG-SC mode PPDU), the EDMG SC mode PPDU comprises an EDMG-header-A field (fig.8 and par.[0059] describes the EDMG-Header-A field), and the EDMG-header- A field carries the sensing indication information (par.[0011] which recites, in part, “. A packet classification indicator is included in a reserved bit of the EDMG-Header-A field”).
Regarding claims 3, 10, and 17, Lim discloses:
wherein a reserved bit in the EDMG-header-A field carries the sensing indication information (par.[0011] which recites, in part, “A packet classification indicator is included in a reserved bit of the EDMG-Header-A field”).
Regarding claims 4, 11, and 18, Lim discloses:
wherein the PPDU is the EDMG OFDM mode PPDU (par.[0090] describes an EDMG-OFDM), the EDMG OFDM mode PPDU comprises an EDMG-header-A field (fig.8 and par.[0059] describes the EDMG-Header-A field), and the EDMG- header-A field carries the sensing indication information (par.[0011] which recites, in part, “A packet classification indicator is included in a reserved bit of the EDMG-Header-A field”).
Regarding claims 5, 12, and 19, Lim discloses:
wherein a reserved bit in the EDMG-header-A field carries the sensing indication information (par.[0011] which recites, in part, “A packet classification indicator is included in a reserved bit of the EDMG-Header-A field”).
Regarding claim 8, Lim discloses:
receiving, a physical layer protocol data unit (PPDU) (par.[0009] which teaches that the transmitting station generates a frame for transmission to a receiving station, see fig.1. The frame being a PPDU) , wherein the PPDU comprises sensing indication information (Abstract: describes an indication in the PPDU, par.[0011] recites, in part, “The frame includes an EDMG-Header-A field. A packet classification indicator is included in a reserved bit of the EDMG-Header-A field.), and the sensing indication information indicates that the PPDU is a PPDU used for sensing measurement (par.[0011] which recites, in part, “The packet classification indicator includes information indicating that the frame is a sensing frame used for sensing.”);
wherein the PPDU is a direction multi-gigabit (DMG) single carrier (SC) mode PPDU, an enhanced direction multi-gigabit (EDMG) SC mode PPDU (par.[0090] describes a EDMG-SC), or an EDMG orthogonal frequency division multiplexing (OFDM) mode PPDU (par.[0090] describes an EDMG-OFDM); and
determining, based on the sensing indication information, the PPDU is the PPDU used for sensing measurements (par.[0085] describes the STA receiving the sensing frame can determine that the received frame is a sensing frame using the value of the reserved bits).
Regarding claim 21, Lim teaches:
wherein the sensing indication information indicates that a transmission opportunity (TXOP) protected/set by the PPDU is used for sending a sensing signal (par.[0011] which recites, in part, “The packet classification indicator includes information indicating that the frame is a sensing frame used for sensing.”. The PPDU is sent, or rather has to be sent during a TXOP, and the indicator indicates that the purpose is for sensing. When the STA sends the PPDU it has contended for the transmission medium and secured it for this purpose, see transmission fig.13 element 1320).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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 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) 6, and 13, is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lim as applied to independent claims 1, 8, and 15, in view of Chen et al. (US 2021/0211973 A1).
Regarding claims 6, and 13, the disclosure of Lim teaches a plurality of PPDU for 802.11ad and 802.11ay, but may not disclose:
wherein the PPDU is the DMG SC mode PPDU, the DMG SC mode PPDU comprises a DMG header field, and wherein an additional PPDU indication field and a training length indication field in the DMG header field carry the sensing indication information.
In an analogous art, the disclosure of Chen teaches:
wherein the PPDU is the DMG SC mode PPDU (par.[0070] discloses the DMG PPDU. The office notes that 802.11ad DMG PPDU is Single Carrier), the DMG SC mode PPDU comprises a DMG header field (par.[0075] describes the DMG header field), and wherein an additional PPDU indication field and a training length indication field in the DMG header field carry the sensing indication information (par.[0075] describes the sensing information being carried in the header portion of the DMG field).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the instant application to combine the disclosures of Lim with the disclosure of Chen. The motivation/suggestion would have been to provide a method for determining in a specific 802.11 network a difference between the function of frames.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 7 and 14 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure:
Au et al. (US 2020/0319324 A1) “Method, Apparatus, and System for Qualified Wireless Sensing”
Lim et al. (US 2023/0198579 A1) “Method and Apparatus for Performing Sensing in Wireless LAN System”
Jang et al. (US 2023/0224955 A1) “Method and Device for Performing Grouping for Sensing in Wireless LAN System”
Jang et al. (US 2023/0224695 A1) “Method and Device for Performing Sensing in Wireless LAN System”
Kim et al. (US 2023/0262758 A1) “Method and Device for Performing Sensing in Wireless LAN System”
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JAMAAL HENSON whose telephone number is (571)272-5339. The examiner can normally be reached M-Thu: 7:30 am - 6:30 pm.
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, Derrick Ferris can be reached at (571)272-3123. 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.
JAMAAL HENSON
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 2411
/JAMAAL HENSON/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2411
Prosecution Insights