DETAILED ACTION
This office action is a response to the application filed on 10/30/2024, which is a 371 application entering national stage from PCT/JP2023/016042 filed on 4/24/2023. Acknowledgment is made of applicant's claim for foreign priority based on an application JP2022-078389 filed on 5/11/2022. Claims 1-19 are pending and ready for examination.
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 .
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 101
35 U.S.C. 101 reads as follows:
Whoever invents or discovers any new and useful process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter, or any new and useful improvement thereof, may obtain a patent therefor, subject to the conditions and requirements of this title.
Claim 18 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to non-statutory subject matter. Claim 18 is directed to a program causing a compute to function…(i.e. software per se), which does not fall within at least one of the four categories of patent eligible subject matter.
Claim Interpretation – 112(f)
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(f):
(f) Element in Claim for a Combination. – An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The claims in this application are given their broadest reasonable interpretation using the plain meaning of the claim language in light of the specification as it would be understood by one of ordinary skill in the art. The broadest reasonable interpretation of a claim element (also commonly referred to as a claim limitation) is limited by the description in the specification when 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is invoked.
As explained in MPEP § 2181, subsection I, claim limitations that meet the following three-prong test will be interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
(A) the claim limitation uses the term “means” or “step” or a term used as a substitute for “means” that is a generic placeholder (also called a nonce term or a non-structural term having no specific structural meaning) for performing the claimed function;
(B) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is modified by functional language, typically, but not always linked by the transition word “for” (e.g., “means for”) or another linking word or phrase, such as “configured to” or “so that”; and
(C) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is not modified by sufficient structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function.
Use of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim with functional language creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites sufficient structure, material, or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Absence of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is not to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is not interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites function without reciting sufficient structure, material or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Claim limitations in this application that use the word “means” (or “step”) are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action. Conversely, claim limitations in this application that do not use the word “means” (or “step”) are not being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action.
Following limitation of Claim 1:
-a communication control unit that performs control of receiving first information…
is being treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) because it uses a generic placeholder “unit” coupled with functional language “performs control of receiving” without reciting sufficient structure to achieve the function. Furthermore, the generic placeholder is not preceded by a structural modifier.
However, the claim recites the above means-plus-function as the only limitation in the claim, and the means recitation does not appear in combination with another recited element of means. Therefore, claim 1 is interpreted as a single means claim (see MPEP 2181 V).
Furthermore, claims 2, 6-10 and 13-15 include various limitations that use a generic placeholder “unit” coupled with function language without reciting sufficient structure to achieve the function. Therefore, claims 2, 6-10 and 13-15 are also being treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f).
Since these claim limitations invoke 35 U.S.C. 112(f), they are being interpreted to cover the corresponding structure described in the specification that achieves the claimed function, and equivalents thereof.
A review of the specification shows that the following appears to be the corresponding structure described in the specification for the 35 U.S.C. 112(f) limitation: Figures 5-7 and related specification paragraphs 0125-0181.
If applicant wishes to provide further explanation or dispute the examiner’s interpretation of the corresponding structure, applicant must identify the corresponding structure with reference to the specification by page and line number, and to the drawing, if any, by reference characters in response to this Office action.
If applicant does not intend to have the claim limitations treated under 35 U.S.C. 112(f), applicant may amend the claims so that it/they will clearly not invoke 35 U.S.C. 112(f), or present a sufficient showing that the claims recite sufficient structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function to preclude application of 35 U.S.C. 112(f).
For more information, see MPEP § 2173 et seq. and Supplementary Examination Guidelines for Determining Compliance With 35 U.S.C. 112 and for Treatment of Related Issues in Patent Applications, 76 FR 7162, 7167 (Feb. 9, 2011).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a):
(a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention.
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112:
The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor of carrying out his invention.
Claim 1 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, first paragraph, because the claim purports to invoke 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph (see claim interpretation section above), but fails to recite a combination of elements as required by that statutory provision and thus cannot rely on the specification to provide the structure, material or acts to support the claimed function. As such, the claim recites a function that has no limits and covers every conceivable means for achieving the stated function, while the specification discloses at most only those means known to the inventor. Accordingly, the disclosure is not commensurate with the scope of the claim.
Claims 2-16 are also rejected because they are depended upon the rejected base claim as set forth above.
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 1-2, 13-14 and 16-19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Cordeiro et al. (US 2010/0074190, hereinafter Cordeiro) in view of Kim et al. (US 2023/0209391, hereinafter Kim).
Regarding claim 1, Cordeiro discloses a wireless communication control device comprising a communication control unit that performs control of receiving first information from a wireless communication device via one of a plurality of links set in advance with the wireless communication device [Cordeiro Figure 1 discloses a multi-band wireless network comprising access points and mobile stations (Cordeiro Figure 1, paragraph 0013). Cordeiro Figure 4 discloses multi-band data communication between an access point and a station where a station may receive a response frame in a beacon (345 in Fig. 4) on a radio channel, and data blocks may be exchanged (i.e. receiving first information) (Cordeiro Figure 4, paragraphs 0020 and 0021)] and transmitting use reservation information indicating that a use opportunity for at least one of the plurality of links is to be secured in advance [Cordeiro discloses that one or more acknowledgement frames (450 in Figure 4) may be transmitted (Cordeiro Figure 4, paragraph 0021)].
Cordeiro does not expressly disclose the feature of transmitting use reservation information indicating that a use opportunity for at least one of the plurality of links is to be secured in advance.
However, in the same or similar field of invention, Kim Figure 9 discloses an example of a preferred link transmission method where the enhanced multi-link single radio MLD may transmit preferred link information through a Block Ack frame. A single radio STA/MLD may transmit Block Ack in response to data reception. A preferred link (PL) information in the block ack may be related to another link (link 2), and the AP may attempt data transmission using the link 2 during next transmission by using the preferred link information related to the link 2 (Kim Figure 9, paragraph 0115). Transmitting preferred link information through a block ack frame corresponds to transmitting use reservation information indicating a use opportunity for a link to be secured so that it can be used for next transmission.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Cordeiro to have the feature of transmitting use reservation information indicating that a use opportunity for at least one of the plurality of links is to be secured in advance; as taught by Kim. The suggestion/motivation would have been to provide an improved method for communication between AP and single radio MLD by enabling efficient use of radio links (Kim paragraphs 0095-0098).
Regarding claim 2, Cordeiro and Kim disclose the wireless communication control device according to claim 1. Cordeiro and Kim further disclose wherein the communication control unit performs control of transmitting the use reservation information by using a link for which it is indicated by the use reservation information that a use opportunity is to be secured in advance [Kim discloses that A preferred link (PL) information in the block ack may be related to another link (link 2), and the AP may attempt data transmission using the link 2 during next transmission by using the preferred link information related to the link 2. The RTS/CTS may be transmitted through the link 2 (Kim paragraph 0115); indicating that the control of transmitting the use reservation information is performed by using the link indicated by the use reservation information]. In addition, the same motivation is used as the rejection of claim 1.
Regarding claim 13, Cordeiro and Kim disclose the wireless communication control device according to claim 1. Cordeiro and Kim further disclose regarding a communication unit that sets a link for which it is indicated by the use reservation information that a use opportunity is to be secured, as a link to be used for transmission or reception of a frame [Kim Figure 5 discloses an example of a transmission device and/or receiving device which includes a transceiver (i.e. a communication unit) for setting a link for which it is indicated by the use reservation information that a use opportunity is to be secured, as a link to be used for transmission or reception of a frame (Kim Figure 5, paragraphs 0083-0087)]. In addition, the same motivation is used as the rejection of claim 1.
Regarding claim 14, Cordeiro and Kim disclose the wireless communication control device according to claim 1. Cordeiro and Kim further disclose wherein the communication control unit performs control of including the use reservation information in a reception confirmation response frame corresponding to a data frame as the first information received from the wireless communication device and transmitting the reception confirmation response frame [Kim Figure 9 discloses an example of a preferred link transmission method where the enhanced multi-link single radio MLD may transmit preferred link information through a Block Ack frame. A single radio STA/MLD may transmit Block Ack in response to data reception (i.e. include the use reservation information in a reception confirmation response frame corresponding to a data frame) (Kim Figure 9, paragraph 0115)]. In addition, the same motivation is used as the rejection of claim 1.
Regarding claim 16, Cordeiro and Kim disclose the wireless communication control device according to claim 1. Cordeiro and Kim further disclose wherein the wireless communication control device is a device that performs an operation compatible with Extended Multi-Link Single Radio (EMLSR) [Kim discloses that an AP may perform data transmission through a link; and the EMLSR MLD may transmit data including preferred link information (Kim paragraph 0112). In another example, an EMLSR non-AP STA/MLD may transmit block ack, and the preferred link may be set to link 2 (Kim paragraph 0113)]. In addition, the same motivation is used as the rejection of claim 1.
Regarding claim 17, Cordeiro discloses a wireless communication control method comprising performing, by a wireless communication control device, control of receiving first information from a wireless communication device via one of a plurality of links set in advance with the wireless communication device [Cordeiro Figure 1 discloses a multi-band wireless network comprising access points and mobile stations (Cordeiro Figure 1, paragraph 0013). Cordeiro Figure 4 discloses multi-band data communication between an access point and a station where a station may receive a response frame in a beacon (345 in Fig. 4) on a radio channel, and data blocks may be exchanged (i.e. receiving first information) (Cordeiro Figure 4, paragraphs 0020 and 0021)] and transmitting use reservation information indicating that a use opportunity for at least one of the plurality of links is to be secured in advance [Cordeiro discloses that one or more acknowledgement frames (450 in Figure 4) may be transmitted (Cordeiro Figure 4, paragraph 0021)].
Cordeiro does not expressly disclose the feature of transmitting use reservation information indicating that a use opportunity for at least one of the plurality of links is to be secured in advance.
However, in the same or similar field of invention, Kim Figure 9 discloses an example of a preferred link transmission method where the enhanced multi-link single radio MLD may transmit preferred link information through a Block Ack frame. A single radio STA/MLD may transmit Block Ack I response to data reception. A preferred link (PL) information in the block ack may be related to another link (link 2), and the AP may attempt data transmission using the link 2 during next transmission by using the preferred link information related to the link 2 (Kim Figure 9, paragraph 0115). Transmitting preferred link information through a block ack frame corresponds to transmitting use reservation information indicating a use opportunity for a link to be secured so that it can be used for next transmission.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Cordeiro to have the feature of transmitting use reservation information indicating that a use opportunity for at least one of the plurality of links is to be secured in advance; as taught by Kim. The suggestion/motivation would have been to provide an improved method for communication between AP and single radio MLD by enabling efficient use of radio links (Kim paragraphs 0095-0098).
Regarding claim 18, Cordeiro discloses a program causing a compute to function as a communication control unit that performs control of receiving first information from a wireless communication device via one of a plurality of links set in advance with the wireless communication device [Cordeiro Figure 1 discloses a multi-band wireless network comprising access points and mobile stations (Cordeiro Figure 1, paragraph 0013). Cordeiro Figure 4 discloses multi-band data communication between an access point and a station where a station may receive a response frame in a beacon (345 in Fig. 4) on a radio channel, and data blocks may be exchanged (i.e. receiving first information) (Cordeiro Figure 4, paragraphs 0020 and 0021)] and transmitting use reservation information indicating that a use opportunity for at least one of the plurality of links is to be secured in advance [Cordeiro discloses that one or more acknowledgement frames (450 in Figure 4) may be transmitted (Cordeiro Figure 4, paragraph 0021)].
Cordeiro does not expressly disclose the feature of transmitting use reservation information indicating that a use opportunity for at least one of the plurality of links is to be secured in advance.
However, in the same or similar field of invention, Kim Figure 9 discloses an example of a preferred link transmission method where the enhanced multi-link single radio MLD may transmit preferred link information through a Block Ack frame. A single radio STA/MLD may transmit Block Ack I response to data reception. A preferred link (PL) information in the block ack may be related to another link (link 2), and the AP may attempt data transmission using the link 2 during next transmission by using the preferred link information related to the link 2 (Kim Figure 9, paragraph 0115). Transmitting preferred link information through a block ack frame corresponds to transmitting use reservation information indicating a use opportunity for a link to be secured so that it can be used for next transmission. Kim further discloses that software codes may be included in the memories which may include instructions for controlling an operation of the processors (Kim paragraphs 0048 and 0049).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Cordeiro to have the feature of transmitting use reservation information indicating that a use opportunity for at least one of the plurality of links is to be secured in advance; as taught by Kim. The suggestion/motivation would have been to provide an improved method for communication between AP and single radio MLD by enabling efficient use of radio links (Kim paragraphs 0095-0098).
Regarding claim 19, Cordeiro discloses a wireless communication control device comprising a communication control unit that performs control of transmitting first information to a wireless communication device via one of a plurality of links set in advance with the wireless communication device [Cordeiro Figure 1 discloses a multi-band wireless network comprising access points and mobile stations (Cordeiro Figure 1, paragraph 0013). Cordeiro Figure 4 discloses multi-band data communication between an access point and a station where a station may receive a response frame in a beacon (345 in Fig. 4) on a radio channel, and data blocks may be exchanged (i.e. transmitting first information) (Cordeiro Figure 4, paragraphs 0020 and 0021)] and receiving use reservation information indicating that a use opportunity for at least one of the plurality of links is to be secured in advance [Cordeiro discloses that one or more acknowledgement frames (450 in Figure 4) may be transmitted and received by the control device (Cordeiro Figure 4, paragraph 0021)].
Cordeiro does not expressly disclose the feature of receiving use reservation information indicating that a use opportunity for at least one of the plurality of links is to be secured in advance.
However, in the same or similar field of invention, Kim Figure 9 discloses an example of a preferred link transmission method where the enhanced multi-link single radio MLD may transmit preferred link information through a Block Ack frame. A single radio STA/MLD may transmit Block Ack I response to data reception. A preferred link (PL) information in the block ack may be related to another link (link 2), and the AP may attempt data transmission using the link 2 during next transmission by using the preferred link information related to the link 2 (Kim Figure 9, paragraph 0115). The block ack frame with preferred link information is received by the control device which indicates a use opportunity for a link to be secured so that it can be used for next transmission.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Cordeiro to have the feature of receiving use reservation information indicating that a use opportunity for at least one of the plurality of links is to be secured in advance; as taught by Kim. The suggestion/motivation would have been to provide an improved method for communication between AP and single radio MLD by enabling efficient use of radio links (Kim paragraphs 0095-0098).
Claim 3 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Cordeiro in view of Kim, and further in view of Sun et al. (US 2023/0308938, hereinafter Sun).
Regarding claim 3, Cordeiro and Kim disclose the wireless communication control device according to claim 1. Cordeiro and Kim do not expressly disclose wherein the use reservation information includes valid period information indicating a valid period of a use opportunity secured.
However, in the same or similar field of invention, Sun discloses that a BA frame may be transmitted following data, and based on the information carried by multi-link trigger frame, the activation of a link may be for a period of time (Sun paragraph 0170).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Cordeiro and Kim to have the feature of wherein the use reservation information includes valid period information indicating a valid period of a use opportunity secured; as taught by Sun. The suggestion/motivation would have been to efficiently and effectively manage, steer and control link usages between MLDs (Sun paragraph 0107).
Claim 15 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Cordeiro in view of Kim, and further in view of Kneckt et al. (US 2021/0345403, hereinafter Kneckt).
Regarding claim 15, Cordeiro and Kim disclose the wireless communication control device according to claim 1. Cordeiro and Kim do not expressly disclose wherein the communication control unit transmits information regarding a transmission capability for the use reservation information prior to transmission of the use reservation information.
However, in the same or similar field of invention, Kneckt Figure 2 discloses an example wireless system where STAs may exchange RTS/CTS frames to indicate RTS/CTS capabilities which may include a set of reserved channels (Kneckt paragraphs 0046, 0047 and 0051).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Cordeiro and Kim to have the feature of wherein the communication control unit transmits information regarding a transmission capability for the use reservation information prior to transmission of the use reservation information; as taught by Kneckt. The suggestion/motivation would have been to enable reserving a medium for transporting data utilizing extremely high throughput protocol, and enable flexible EHT bandwidth channel reservation (Kneckt paragraph 0004).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 4-12 would be allowable if rewritten to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), 1st paragraph, set forth in this Office action and to include all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Claim 4 would be allowable because the closest prior art, either alone or in combination, fails to anticipate or render obvious the features of wherein the use reservation information includes information regarding a device that transmits the use reservation information and information regarding a device that receives the use reservation information; in combination with all other limitations in the base claim and any intervening claims.
Claim 5 would be allowable because the closest prior art, either alone or in combination, fails to anticipate or render obvious the features of wherein the use reservation information includes information regarding a device that performs transmission using a link for which a use opportunity is secured and information regarding a device that performs reception using a link for which a use opportunity is secured; in combination with all other limitations in the base claim and any intervening claims.
Claim 6 would be allowable because the closest prior art, either alone or in combination, fails to anticipate or render obvious the features of wherein the communication control unit performs control of transmitting use cancellation information indicating that a use opportunity is to be canceled; in combination with all other limitations in the base claim and any intervening claims.
Claim 9 would be allowable because the closest prior art, either alone or in combination, fails to anticipate or render obvious the features of further comprising a link usage status detection unit that detects a usage status of the plurality of links, wherein the communication control unit specifies a link for which it is indicated by the use reservation information that a use opportunity is to be secured, on a basis of the usage status of the plurality of links detected; in combination with all other limitations in the base claim and any intervening claims.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SAUMIT SHAH whose telephone number is (571)272-6959. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 9 am - 6 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, EDAN ORGAD can be reached at (571) 272-7884. 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.
/SAUMIT SHAH/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2414
Prosecution Insights