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 § 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)(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) 1-8, 11, 12 and 14 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102 as being anticipated by Saad (20250203415).
As per claim 1, Saad shows the use of a method for performing sensing measurement by a first station (STA) in a wireless LAN system, the method comprising: receiving, from a second STA, a sensing measurement setup request frame including a sensing measurement parameter element (e.g., paragraphs 2 and 3); transmitting, to the second STA, a sensing measurement setup response frame in response to the sensing measurement setup request frame (e.g., paragraph 3); and performing a sensing measurement in a sensing measurement instance based on the sensing measurement parameter element (e.g., paragraph 110), wherein the sensing measurement parameter element includes i) first information indicating whether the sensing measurement instance is a trigger based (TB) sensing measurement instance or a non-TB sensing measurement instance, and ii) second information indicating a configuration of the sensing measurement instance based on the first information (e.g., abstract).
As per claim 2, Saad shows the use of wherein: the first information is indicated by a first field included in the sensing measurement parameter element, based on the first field value being set to 0, the sensing measurement instance is indicated by the first field as the non-TB sensing measurement instance, and based on the first field value being set to 1, the sensing measurement instance is indicated by the first field as the TB sensing measurement instance (e.g., paragraph 117).
As per claim 3, Saad shows the use of wherein: based on the first field value being set to 0, a configuration of the non-TB sensing measurement instance is indicated by the second information, and based on the first field value being set to 1, a configuration of the TB sensing measurement instance is indicated by the second information (e.g., paragraph 117).
As per claim 4, Saad shows the use of wherein: the TB sensing measurement instance includes at least one of a polling phase, a trigger frame (TF) sounding phase, a null data physical protocol data unit (PPDU) (NDP) announcement sounding phase, or a reporting phase (e.g., paragraph 3).
As per claim 5, Saad shows the use of wherein: the sensing measurement setup response frame includes information indicating a configuration of the sensing measurement instance requested by the second information or the first STA (e.g., paragraph 3).
As per claim 6, Saad shows the use of wherein: the second information indicating the configuration of the TB sensing measurement instance is indicated by a second field included in the sensing measurement parameter element, and the second information indicating the configuration of the non-TB sensing measurement instance is indicated by a third field included in the sensing measurement parameter element (e.g., paragraphs 3 and 117).
As per claim 7, Saad shows the use of wherein: the sensing measurement parameter element includes a sensing measurement parameter field, and the sensing measurement parameter field includes information indicating whether a role of the first STA is a sensing transmitter or a sensing receiver (e.g., paragraphs 4 and 110 and Table 13).
As per claim 8, Saad shows the use of wherein: based on a trigger frame being received from the second STA in the TF sounding phase, NDP is transmitted to the second STA in a bandwidth (BW) indicated through the trigger frame (e.g., paragraph 137).
As per claim 11, Saad shows the use of wherein: the first STA is a sensing responder, and the second STA is a sensing initiator (e.g., paragraphs 3 and 4 and Table 13).
As per claim 12, it is rejected for similar reasons as claim 1. In addition, Saad shows the use of the first STA comprising: at least one transceiver; and at least one processor connected to the at least one transceiver (e.g., figure 1B).
As per claim 14, it is rejected for similar reasons as claims 1 and 12.
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.
Claim(s) 9-10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Saad (20250203415) in view of Katla (20240291536).
As per claim 9, Saad shows the use of wherein: based on the trigger frame being transmitted from the second STA to a plurality of STAs including the first STA (e.g., paragraph 84), but does not show the trigger frame includes information about an order in which each of the plurality of STAs transmits the NDP. Katla shows the use of the trigger frame includes information about an order in which each of the plurality of STAs transmits the NDP (e.g. paragraph 223). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date to modify the method of Saad with Katla because it would provide for improved sensing feedback.
As per claim 10, Saad shows the use of wherein: the plurality of STAs are non-access point (AP) STAs, and the second STA is an AP (e.g., paragraph 130).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to John Follansbee whose telephone number is 571-272-3964. The examiner can normally be reached Monday -Friday 8AM-5PM.
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.
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.
/JOHN A FOLLANSBEE/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2444
Prosecution Insights