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 .
Priority
Applicant’s claim for the benefit of a prior-filed application under 35 U.S.C. 119(e) or under 35 U.S.C. 120, 121, or 365(c) is acknowledged. Applicant has not complied with one or more conditions for receiving the benefit of an earlier filing date under 35 U.S.C. 119/120 as follows:
The later-filed application must be an application for a patent for an invention which is also disclosed in the prior application (the parent or original nonprovisional application or provisional application). The disclosure of the invention in the parent application and in the later-filed application must be sufficient to comply with the requirements of 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, except for the best mode requirement. See Transco Products, Inc. v. Performance Contracting, Inc., 38 F.3d 551, 32 USPQ2d 1077 (Fed. Cir. 1994)
The disclosure of the prior-filed applications, Application No. 17/144,844 fail to provide adequate support or enablement in the manner provided by 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, first paragraph for one or more claims of this application.
Prior-filed applications fail to provide enablement for at least the following claimed features, as well as similarly worded features: receive an association request frame on the first frequency band, wherein the association request frame is used to request an association in the first frequency band and the second frequency band; send an association response frame on the first frequency band, wherein the association response frame is used to indicate the communication apparatus to establish the association in the first frequency band and the second frequency band
Specification
The specification is objected to as failing to provide proper antecedent basis for the claimed subject matter. See 37 CFR 1.75(d)(1) and MPEP § 608.01(o). Correction of the following is required: Applicant’s specification dated 9/11/2024 fails to provide any description related to “receive an association request frame on the first frequency band, wherein the association request frame is used to request an association in the first frequency band and the second frequency band; send an association response frame on the first frequency band, wherein the association response frame is used to indicate the communication apparatus to establish the association in the first frequency band and the second frequency band”
The title of the invention is not descriptive. A new title is required that is clearly indicative of the invention to which the claims are directed.
The following title is suggested: Method and Apparatus for Multiband Association
Double Patenting
The nonstatutory double patenting rejection is based on a judicially created doctrine grounded in public policy (a policy reflected in the statute) so as to prevent the unjustified or improper timewise extension of the “right to exclude” granted by a patent and to prevent possible harassment by multiple assignees. A nonstatutory obviousness-type double patenting rejection is appropriate where the conflicting claims are not identical, but at least one examined application claim is not patentably distinct from the reference claim(s) because the examined application claim is either anticipated by, or would have been obvious over, the reference claim(s). See, e.g., In re Berg, 140 F.3d 1428, 46 USPQ2d 1226 (Fed. Cir. 1998); In re Goodman, 11 F.3d 1046, 29 USPQ2d 2010 (Fed. Cir. 1993); In re Longi, 759 F.2d 887, 225 USPQ 645 (Fed. Cir. 1985); In re Van Ornum, 686 F.2d 937, 214 USPQ 761 (CCPA 1982); In re Vogel, 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); and In re Thorington, 418 F.2d 528, 163 USPQ 644 (CCPA 1969).
A timely filed terminal disclaimer in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(c) or 1.321(d) may be used to overcome an actual or provisional rejection based on a nonstatutory double patenting ground provided the conflicting application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with this application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement.
Effective January 1, 1994, a registered attorney or agent of record may sign a terminal disclaimer. A terminal disclaimer signed by the assignee must fully comply with 37 CFR 3.73(b).
Claims 1, 7 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory obviousness-type double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1, 4 of US Patent 12,120,650, hereafter patent’650, in view of Chandra (USPN 20130051328).
Regarding claim 1 of the instant application, claim 1 of patent’650 discloses
A data transmission method, comprising: (claim 1, line 1)
a probe request frame on a first frequency band, wherein the probe request frame includes capability information of a communication apparatus in the first frequency band and capability information of the communication apparatus in a second frequency band; (claim 1, lines 2-6)
a probe response frame on the first frequency band; (claim 1, line 7-8)
an association request frame on the first frequency band, wherein the association request frame is used to request an association in the first frequency band and the second frequency band; and (claim 1, lines 9-11)
an association response frame on the first frequency band, wherein the association response frame is used to indicate the communication apparatus to establish the association in the first frequency band and the second frequency band. (claim 1, lines 12-15)
Patent’650 does not expressly discloses receiving a probe request frame/sending a probe response frame, receiving an association request/sending an association response
Chandra discloses an AP receiving probe request and sending probe response as well as receiving association request and sending association response [0005, 0006, 0025]
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to implement “receiving a probe request frame/sending a probe response frame, receiving an association request/sending an association response” as taught by Chandra into Patent’650’s system with the motivation to implement well known procedure by AP to allow STAs to access network
Regarding claim 7 of instant application, claim 4 of patent’650 discloses the same limitation
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Choi et al (USPN 20100177756) FIG. 2
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to THAI NGUYEN whose telephone number is (571)270-7632. The examiner can normally be reached M-F campus 10:30-5pm, telework 6pm-8pm| Telework count days.
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, Ian N Moore can be reached at (571)272-3085. 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.
/THAI NGUYEN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2469
Prosecution Insights