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 .
Status of claims
Claims 26-45 filed 11/30/24 are pending.
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)(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 26, 38, 42, 43 and 44 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Liu et al. (US 20190260621 A1), hereinafter, Liu.
Regarding claim 26:
Liu discloses an apparatus comprising logic and circuitry configured to cause a millimeterWave (mmWave) wireless communication station (STA) (Paragraphs [0003] and [0044]) to:
transmit a preamble of a packet via a plurality of antennas of the mmWave STA over a mmWave wireless communication channel (Paragraphs [0004], [0054], [0055] and paragraph [0012]m, multi-antenna transmission is claimed tramit via plurality of antennas); and
transmit a Multiple-Input-Multiple-Output (MIMO) Training (TRN) field of the packet over the mmWave wireless communication channel (Paragraphs [0018], [0059], [0060]), the MIMO TRN field is after the preamble (Paragraphs [0004] and [0059]), the MIMO TRN field comprising a sequence of a plurality of MIMO TRN subfields transmitted via the plurality of antennas of the mmWave STA (Paragraph [0018]), wherein a MIMO TRN subfield of the plurality of MIMO TRN subfields comprises a plurality of TRN sequences simultaneously transmitted via the plurality of antennas , respectively (Paragraph [0018], each TRN subfield sends a sequence, i.e. the plurality of MIMO TRN subfields comprises a plurality of TRN sequences simultaneously transmitted via the plurality of antennas, respectively, as claimed).
Regarding claim 38:
Liu discloses the apparatus wherein the plurality of MIMO TRN subfields are identical (Paragraph [0018], TRN subfields send a same sequence, i.e. are identical).
Regarding claim 42:
Liu discloses all the limitations of claim 26 above. Further, Liu discloses the
apparatus, wherein the plurality of antennas of the mmWave STA comprises a first antenna and a second antenna, wherein the MIMO TRN subfield comprises a first TRN sequence and a second TRN sequence simultaneously transmitted via the first and second antennas, respectively (Paragraph [0018]; plurality of TRN subfields, each with its respective TRN sequence (claimed first and second TRN sequence) are transmitted simultaneously in multi-steam MIMO, using a first antenna and second antenna; see paragraph [0065], [0066]).
Regarding claim 43:
Liu discloses all the limitations of claim 26 above. Further, Liu discloses the apparatus comprising a radio to transmit the packet over the mmWave wireless communication channel, one or more antennas connected to the radio, and a processor to execute instructions of an operating system (Paragraphs [0005], [0044], [0045]; the wireless network with STAs using multi-antennas/MIMO use 802.11 ay protocol i.e. the apparatus comprises radio connected to one or more antennas)
Regarding claim 44:
Claim 44 is rejected as being anticipated by Liu based on a rationale similar to the one used to reject claim 26 above. Liu also discloses a product comprising one or more tangible computer-readable non-transitory storage media comprising instructions operable to, when executed by at least one processor, enable the at least one processor to cause the millimeterWave (mmWave) wireless communication station (STA) to perform claimed steps (See paragraphs [0044], [0125]-[0128]).
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.
Claims 27 and 45 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Liu in view of Kasher et al. (US 20180248600 A1), hereinafter, Kasher
Regarding claims 27 and 45:
Liu discloses all the limitations of claims 26 and 44 above, but fails to explicitly disclose the apparatus and corresponding product configured to cause the mmWave STA to transmit a sequence of a plurality of sector-sweep packets via a respective plurality of antenna sector combinations during a Transmit Sector Sweep (TXSS), wherein transmission of a sector-sweep packet via an antenna sector combination comprises transmission of the preamble of the packet and the MIMO TRN field of the packet via the plurality of antennas according to the antenna sector combination, wherein the antenna sector combination comprises a combination of sectors of the plurality of antennas.
However, Kasher discloses the apparatus configured to cause an STA to transmit a sequence of a plurality of sector-sweep packets via a respective plurality of antenna sector combinations during a Transmit Sector Sweep (TXSS), wherein transmission of a sector-sweep packet via an antenna sector combination comprises transmission of the preamble of the packet and the MIMO TRN field of the packet via the plurality of antennas according to the antenna sector combination, wherein the antenna sector combination comprises a combination of sectors of the plurality of antennas (Paragraphs [0072]-[0075]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to have Liu’s STA transmit a sequence of a plurality of sector-sweep packets via a respective plurality of antenna sector combinations during a Transmit Sector Sweep (TXSS), wherein transmission of a sector-sweep packet via an antenna sector combination comprises transmission of the preamble of the packet and the MIMO TRN field of the packet via the plurality of antennas according to the antenna sector combination, wherein the antenna sector combination comprises a combination of sectors of the plurality of antennas as disclosed by Kasher. It would have been obvious because it allows for communication at low SNRs and in different directions (Paragraph [0070]).
Claim 37 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Liu in view of Christin et al. (US 20130070697 A1), hereinafter, Christin.
Regarding claim 37:
Liu further discloses the apparatus configured to cause the mmWave STA to transmit the preamble of the packet by transmitting a sequence of preamble fields (Paragraph [0018], simultaneous transmission of the packet inherently involves transmission of a sequence of preamble fields).
However, Liu fails to explicitly disclose the preamble fields duplicated via the plurality of antennas.
However, Christin discloses preamble fields duplicated via the plurality of antennas (Paragraph [0200]; duplicated preambles are transmitted via a plurality of antennas, i.e. preamble fields duplicated via the plurality of antennas).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date that Liu’s simultaneous transmission of the preamble of the packet would entail preamble fields duplicated via the plurality of antennas as disclosed by Christin. It would have been obvious in order to provide redundancy against interference on the channels.
Claim 40 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Liu in view of Lim et al. (US 20180083679 A1), hereinafter, Lim.
Regarding claim 40:
Liu discloses all the limitations of claim 26 above, but fails to explicitly disclose the apparatus configured to cause the mmWave STA to process feedback information in an other packet from another STA, the feedback information based on a measurement corresponding to the MIMO TRN field.
However, Lim discloses an apparatus configured to cause a STA to process feedback information in an other packet from an other STA, the feedback information based on a measurement corresponding to the TRN field (Paragraph [0122], STA 713 (claimed STA) receives BRP packet (claimed an other packet) from AP 711 (claimed an other STA) including measurement feedback corresponding to TRN field and processes it ).
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify Liu’s STA to process feedback information in an other packet from an other STA, the feedback information based on a measurement corresponding to the TRN field as disclosed by Lim thereby resulting in claimed invention. It would have been obvious because it ensures a full duplex communication between the stations.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 28-36, 39 and 41 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
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to VINEETA S PANWALKAR whose telephone number is (571)272-8561. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9:00am-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.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, David C. Payne can be reached at 571-272-3024. 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.
/VINEETA S PANWALKAR/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2635
Prosecution Insights