DETAILED ACTION
This communication is in response to Application No. 18/839,205 filed on 8/16/2024. The preliminary amendment presented on 8/16/2024, which cancels claims 1-57 and adds new claims 58-77, is hereby acknowledged. Claims 58-77 have been examined.
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 .
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 8/30/2024 is being considered by the examiner.
Claim Objections
Claims 74-76 are objected to because of the following informalities:
In claim 74, line 2, the acronym “DCM” should be corrected as –Dual Carrier Modulation (DCM)--. Similar correction is required for OFDMA and TDMA in claims 75 and 76 respectively.
Appropriate correction is required.
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.
Claims 58, 60, 64-66, 68-69, 72, and 77 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Rajakarunanayake et al. (hereinafter Rajakarunanayake)(US 2015/0078180).
Regarding claims 58, 68, and 77, Rajakarunanayake teaches as follows:
An access point (AP 131 in figure 3 and Access Point 610-612 in figure 6) for a wireless communication system, the access point comprising:
at least one processor (164 in figure 1), and
a memory (166 in figure 1) containing program code executable by the at least one processor, whereby the processor and program code are configured so that execution of the program code by the at least one processor causes the access point to (the communication adaptation logic 161 includes one or more processors 164 and memories 166. The memory 166 stores, for example, communication adaptation instructions 167 (e.g., program instructions) that the processor 164 executes to carry out any of the adaptation features described below, see, ¶ [0019])(the wireless access point 131 may include a communication interface 321 and communication adaptation logic 322, see, ¶ [0036] and figure 3. Therefore, the communication adaptation logic 322 of AP 131 inherently includes the claimed processor and the memory):
coordinate sending of data on a wireless link, established between the wireless device (interpreted as the destination device or manufacturing device 113 in figure 6) and the access point (the access points 610-612 may coordinate beamforming parameters to redundantly deliver packet flow to a destination device, see, ¶ [0057])(the communication adaptation logic 322 may cause the access point 131 to send a wireless communication to the manufacturing device 113 using a first wireless technology, see, ¶ [0037] and figure 3) by at least one of:
a first wireless transmission performed by the access point (interpreted as the access point 610)(the access point 610 may perform beamforming or spatial filtering to direct a packet flow sent from the control device 121 to a destination device, such as the manufacturing device 113, see, ¶ [0057] and figure 6), and
a second wireless transmission performed on behalf of the access point by a further access point (interpreted as the access point 612) of the wireless communication system (access point 612 may also perform beamforming to direct the same packet flow to the manufacturing device 113, see, ¶ [0057] and figure 6),
wherein the first wireless transmission and the second wireless transmission carry the same data in a redundant manner (coordination among the access points 610-612 may vary according to any number of packet characteristics. For example, the access points 610-612 may each redundantly send a packet flow to a destination device when the packet flow exceeds a threshold priority level… The access point selection may be coordinated by a management system or through exchanged coordination communications between the access points 610-612. Selection of multiple access points is also possible, and communications through the multiple access point may be redundant (e.g., cloned packet flow), see, ¶ [0062] and figure 6).
Regarding claims 60 and 72, Rajakarunanayake teaches as follows:
Wherein the access point coordinates the sending of the data by at least one of the first wireless transmission and multiple second wireless transmissions performed on behalf of the access point by multiple further access points (interpreted as the access point 611 and 612 in figure 6) of the wireless communication system (the communication adaptation logic 322 may cause the access point 131 to send a wireless communication to the manufacturing device 113 using a first wireless technology, see, ¶ [0037] and figure 3)(the coordination between the access points 610-612 and their respective communication paths may specify multiple redundant communications to the destination device or a single communication through an optimum communication pathway selected among the access points 610-612 based on analysis of noise prediction data 168, predicted movement data, real-time sensor data, or any other environment characteristic data, see, ¶ [0061] and figure 6).
Regarding claim 64, Rajakarunanayake teaches as follows:
Wherein the coordination comprises deciding whether to perform either the first wireless transmission or the second wireless transmission (the coordination between the access points 610-612 and their respective communication paths may specify multiple redundant communications to the destination device or a single communication through an optimum communication pathway selected among the access points 610-612 based on analysis of noise prediction data 168, predicted movement data, real-time sensor data, or any other environment characteristic data, see, ¶ [0061]).
Regarding claim 65, Rajakarunanayake teaches as follows:
Wherein the coordination is based on interaction with a network controller (interpreted as the control device 121 in figure 6) coupled to the access point and the further access point (the control device 121 is linked to the multiple access points labeled as access point 610, access point 611, and access point 612 through which the control device 121 may send a wireless communication to the manufacturing device 113 or other devices in the industrial environment 100. The communication pathways are redundant in that control device 121 may transmit the same packet flow through some or all of the access points 610-612, see, ¶ [0055] and figure 6).
Regarding claims 66, Rajakarunanayake teaches similar limitations as presented above in the rejection for claim 58.
Regarding claim 69, Rajakarunanayake teaches as follows:
A method of controlling wireless transmissions in a wireless communication system (the coordination between the access points 610-612 and their respective communication paths may specify multiple redundant communications to the destination device or a single communication through an optimum communication pathway selected among the access points 610-612 based on analysis of noise prediction data 168, predicted movement data, real-time sensor data, or any other environment characteristic data, see, ¶ [0061]), the method comprising:
a wireless device (interpreted as the destination device 113 in figure 6) establishing a wireless link to an access point of the wireless communication system (the control device 121 may be additionally linked to the manufacturing device 113 through one or more wireless links (e.g., a direct wireless link or through the wireless access point 131), see, ¶ [0020] and figure 2); and
the wireless device receiving data from the wireless link (the access points 610-612 may coordinate beamforming parameters to redundantly deliver packet flow to a destination device, see, ¶ [0057]) by least one of:
a first wireless transmission performed by the access point (interpreted as the access point 610)(the access point 610 may perform beamforming or spatial filtering to direct a packet flow sent from the control device 121 to a destination device, such as the manufacturing device 113, see, ¶ [0057] and figure 6), and
a second wireless transmission performed on behalf of the access point by a further access point (interpreted as the access point 612) of the wireless communication system (access point 612 may also perform beamforming to direct the same packet flow to the manufacturing device 113, see, ¶ [0057] and figure 6),
wherein the first wireless transmission and the second wireless transmission carry the same data in a redundant manner (the access points 610-612 may each redundantly send a packet flow to a destination device when the packet flow exceeds a threshold priority level… The access point selection may be coordinated by a management system or through exchanged coordination communications between the access points 610-612. Selection of multiple access points is also possible, and communications through the multiple access point may be redundant (e.g., cloned packet flow), see, ¶ [0062] and figure 6), and
wherein the first wireless transmission and the second wireless transmission are coordinated on the wireless link (the access points 610-612 may coordinate beamforming parameters to redundantly deliver packet flow to a destination device, see, ¶ [0057]).
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.
Claims 59 and 70-71 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Rajakarunanayake et al. (hereinafter Rajakarunanayake)(US 2015/0078180) in view of Park et al. (hereinafter Park)(US 2023/0103807).
Regarding claims 59 and 70-71, Rajakarunanayake teaches all limitations as presented above except for forwarding the feedback information to the further access point.
Park teaches as follows:
Multi-AP coordination technology in a WLAN system shares channel feedback information (equivalent to applicant’s forwarding channel feedback information received from wireless transmission to the further access point) and scheduling information of STAs between APs, so that interference between BSSs when transmitting and receiving data between AP and STA is minimized and data transmission efficiency is increased by having two or more APs participate in data transmission/reception to and from the STA at a specific time (see, ¶ [0274]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Rajakarunanayake with Park to include sharing channel feedback information between multiple APs as taught by Park in order to improve data transmission efficiency.
Claims 61, 73, and 74 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Rajakarunanayake et al. (hereinafter Rajakarunanayake)(US 2015/0078180) in view of Lim et al. (hereinafter Lim)(US 2023/0283421).
Regarding claims 61, 73, and 74, Rajakarunanayake teaches all limitations as presented above except for the well-known Dual Carrier Modulation (DCM) technique nor the modulation and coding scheme (MCS).
Lim teaches as follows:
A low-level MCS technique is applied to each of the first and second data RUs. For example, each of the first and second data RUs may be modulated based on a BPSK technique. In addition, it is preferable that a dual carrier modulation (DCM) technique is applied to each of the first and second data Rus (see, ¶ [0378]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Rajakarunanayake with Lim to include the well-known Dual Carrier Modulation (DCM) technique and modulation and coding scheme (MCS) technique as taught by Lim in order to improve signal reliability and long-distance coverage.
Claims 62-63 and 75-76 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Rajakarunanayake et al. (hereinafter Rajakarunanayake)(US 2015/0078180) in view of Van Wageningen et al. (hereinafter Wageningen)(US 2023/0337068).
Regarding claims 62 and 75, Rajakarunanayake teaches all limitations as presented above except for the well-known orthogonal frequency-division multiple access (OFDMA).
Wageningen teaches as follows:
When there are multiple Li-Fi APs 120 deployed next to each other or when there are multiple EPs 110 associated to the same local AP 120 or to adjacent APs 120, medium access control (MAC) become necessary for an interference free optical communication. Different MAC mechanisms are possible to be employed in the optical multi-cell wireless network, such as time-division multiple access (TDMA), frequency-division multiple access (FDMA), carrier-sense multiple access (CSMA), code division multiple access (CDMA), space-division multiple access, or a combination of one or more aforementioned mechanisms… Another advanced version of FDMA is orthogonal frequency-division multiple access (OFDMA), where each device may use one or more subcarriers out of the entire band. OFDMA has more flexibility in providing different data rates or quality of service to different users, and in the meanwhile a high resource efficiency can be maintained despite of such diversity (see, ¶ [0099] and figure 1).
Therefore, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Rajakarunanayake with Wageningen to include the well-known orthogonal frequency-division multiple access (OFDMA) as taught by Wageningen in order for efficient medium access control between two wireless transmissions.
Regarding claims 63 and 76, Rajakarunanayake teaches all limitations as presented above except for the well-known Time Division Multiple Access (TDMA).
Wageningen teaches as follows:
When there are multiple Li-Fi APs 120 deployed next to each other or when there are multiple EPs 110 associated to the same local AP 120 or to adjacent APs 120, medium access control (MAC) become necessary for an interference free optical communication. Different MAC mechanisms are possible to be employed in the optical multi-cell wireless network, such as time-division multiple access (TDMA), frequency-division multiple access (FDMA), carrier-sense multiple access (CSMA), code division multiple access (CDMA), space-division multiple access, or a combination of one or more aforementioned mechanisms. TDMA is based on time-division multiplexing scheme, where radio resource is scheduled in time domain and different time slots are assigned to different transmitters in a typically cyclically repetitive frame structure or MAC cycles (see, ¶ [0099] and figure 1).
Therefore, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Rajakarunanayake with Wageningen to include the well-known time-division multiple access (TDMA) as taught by Wageningen in order for efficient medium access control between two wireless transmissions.
Claim 67 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Rajakarunanayake et al. (hereinafter Rajakarunanayake)(US 2015/0078180).
Regarding claim 67, Rajakarunanayake teaches as follows:
The coordination between the access points 610-612 and their respective communication paths may specify multiple redundant communications to the destination device or a single communication through an optimum communication pathway selected among the access points 610-612 based on analysis of noise prediction data 168, predicted movement data, real-time sensor data, or any other environment characteristic data (see, ¶ [0061]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Rajakarunanayake to include selecting an access point based on traffic load on the access point in order for efficient load balancing between multiple access points.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Jeong S Park whose telephone number is (571)270-1597. The examiner can normally be reached Monday through Friday 8:00-4:30 ET.
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, Rebecca E Song can be reached at 571-270-3667. 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.
/JEONG S PARK/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2417
July 25, 2026
Prosecution Insights